ZBC - possible late letter ballot comment
Ballard, Curtis C (HP Storage)
curtis.ballard at hp.com
Tue Mar 3 10:43:01 PST 2015
Formatted message: <a href="http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=r&f=r1503031_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</a>
I don't believe the second paragraph is a subset. The first paragraph starts
in a sequential write required zone and the second starts in a zone that is
not sequential write required. Since that starting conditions are different
that doesn't look to me like a subset relationship.
The first paragraph covers the case where the write starts in a sequential
write required zone and tries to cross out of that zone. In the second
paragraph the write starts in a zone that is not sequential write required
and tries to cross into the sequential write required zone.
It seems like they could be closer together or possible combined into a
single thought but I believe there is a difference.
From: owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] On Behalf Of Joe Breher
Sent: Tuesday, March 3, 2015 10:43 AM
To: T10 Reflector; Curtis Stevens
Cc: Paul Suhler
Subject: ZBC - possible late letter ballot comment
We seem to have some duplicated material in zbc-r02, which has escaped all of
our otherwise vigilant eyes.
Within 22.214.171.124.1, we have both of the following paragraphs:
If the device server processes a write command with an ending LBA that is not
in the same sequential write
required zone as the starting LBA, then the device server shall terminate the
command with CHECK
CONDITION status, with the sense key set to ILLEGAL REQUEST, and the
additional sense code set to WRITE
If the device server processes a write command with the starting LBA that is
not in a sequential write required
zone and specifies an LBA that is in a sequential write required zone, then
the device server shall terminate the
command with CHECK CONDITION status, with the sense key set to ILLEGAL
REQUEST, and the additional
sense code set to WRITE BOUNDARY VIOLATION.
The criteria in the latter paragraph is a proper subset of the criteria in
the first paragraph. Accordingly, the latter paragraph is redundant, and
should be stricken in entirety.
If the editor is amenable, I would like to enter this as a late letter ballot
Upon internal discussion, our esteemed Dr. Suhler points out that ZACr01 has
a similar issue. Expect a corresponding T13 discussion.
Storage Architecture Technologist
Standards Setting Organization
San Jose Research Center
HGST, a Western Digital company
This e-mail may contain confidential or legally privileged information of
HGST. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately by
responding to this e-mail and then deleting it from your system.
More information about the T10