Abort task message during CA 180 deg change

Gerry.Houlder at seagate.com Gerry.Houlder at seagate.com
Fri Jul 27 12:49:37 PDT 2001

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Gerry.Houlder at seagate.com

The trickiest question about clearing CA on an ABORT TASK message is
whether it is appropriate for an ABORT TASK from intiiator A to clear a CA
that exists for initiator B. This seemed like unreasonable interference by
one initiator in another initiator's business.

I have also confirmed our "CA clearing" behavior for several other cases:

ABORT TASK - abort only one task, don't clear any CA.
ABORT TASK SET - abort all commands for sending initiator, clear CA only if
it is for the sending initiator. This is also based on philosophy of not
messing with another initiator's business.
CLEAR QUEUE, TARGET RESET, other general resets - abort all commands for
all initiators, clear CA for all initiators.

The current wording in SPI-4 gives no guidance about different behavior
based on whether the CA is for the same initiator that sent the task
management function or not. Can we agree that this guidance is needed?

George_Penokie at tivoli.com on 07/27/2001 02:16:14 PM

To:   gerry_houlder at notes.seagate.com
cc:   t10 at t10.org

Subject:  Abort task message during CA 180 deg change

On further investigation I have discovered that our drives do execute the
abort task operation during a CA and we do not clear the CA. (my original
source did not understand my question). We, also, do not care which
initiator sends the abort task message we will honor it in all cases.

So I will turn 180 deg, fall on my sword and rewrite my proposal to reflect
the above.

Bye for now,
George Penokie

Dept 2C6  114-2 N212
E-Mail:    gpenokie at tivoli.com
Internal:  553-5208
External: 507-253-5208   FAX: 507-253-2880

* 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 mailing list