Linked commands comment, FCP-2
Bob.Snively at EBay.Sun.COM
Fri Mar 24 15:52:26 PST 2000
* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Bob Snively <Bob.Snively at EBay.Sun.COM>
In its comment number 10 (1.10 of T10/00-150r1.pdf), Crossroads spoke of
breaking links with busy. This led to a lot of discussion and a requirement
that I verify some SAM-2 information. My version 02 of the referenced document
shows the results of my analysis of SAM-2, revision 13:
10 (T): 4.2 Par 7
This paragraph does not appear to allow breaking linking by presentation
of an error or busy status.
The concern is accepted, although some work remains on the resolution.
At the meeting of March 6, 2000, the following partial resolutions were
The first two sentences of the offending paragraph will be corrected to
include the possible case for breaking a command link.
There is an implication that linked commands are indivisible. After
careful review of SAM-2, I find no evidence that linked commands must be
executed without allowing other tasks to enter the enabled and current
There was some discussion about whether or not linked commands can be
ended by a BUSY status. SAM-2 indicates that linking can be broken by
Wording from SAM-2, pdf page 68, concerning Intermediate Status will be
incorporated as appropriate.
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org
More information about the T10