SBC-3 r35j 4.15 text 'xxx medium operation that is not part of an xxx operation' leaves too much to the imagination

Ralph Weber Ralph.Weber at wdc.com
Fri Sep 27 14:16:30 PDT 2013


Formatted message: <a href="http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=r&f=r1309271_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</a>

While some of those present thought the intent was somehow related to
specifying the proper operation of cache coherency implementations, Western
Digital reviewers found the following two list introductions incomprehensibly
vague in SBC-3 r35j.
  *   For each LBA accessed by a write medium operation that is not part of a
write operation:
  *   For each LBA accessed by a read medium operation that is not part of a
read operation:
Is this intended to reach into the design of background operations?
Proposing a solution based on the current, quicksand text seems like a
dubious endeavor, at best.
If the intent is to specify who a device server maintains cache coherency,
the majority of Western Digital reviewers question the need for such
untestable requirements in a T10 standard. If some other concern underlies
the existing text, then perhaps the addition of an e.g. immediately prior to
the colon will set the proper tone.
One fear is clear. If nothing is done, over jealous test engineers are likely
to extend their vision of the cache to include the sector write buffer that
is part of the hardware that actually records data on the medium.
Warning: This comment is the result of a very preliminary review by Western
Digital engineers. The Western Digital review of SBC-3 r35j is ongoing, and
more issues seem likely to be unearthed. Due to the gravity of this issue
Western Digital concluded that prompt disclosure would best serve the
interests of T10 and the industry.
All the best,
.Ralph



More information about the T10 mailing list