Response IU

[George Penokie]

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "George Penokie" <gop at us.ibm.com>
*

Bill,
I see no reason to add in another check when it is not needed. There is
nothing wrong with having both the RSPVALID and SNSVALID bits set and
having corresponding information available in their data fields. So what if
we can't think of a reason why both would have information in them in
todays implementations.

Whenever we state something is illegal it just adds in another condition
that needs to be tested. I say leave it up to the implementer to determine.

Bye for now,
George Penokie

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




                                                                                                                                       
                      "Bill Galloway"                                                                                                  
                      <BillG at breatech.c        To:       "'T10 Reflector'" <t10 at t10.org>                                               
                      om>                      cc:                                                                                     
                      Sent by:                 Subject:  Response IU                                                                   
                      owner-t10 at t10.org                                                                                                
                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                       
                      05/14/02 09:26 PM                                                                                                
                      Please respond to                                                                                                
                      BillG                                                                                                            
                                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                       



* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Bill Galloway" <BillG at breatech.com>
*
This is a question about FCP, SPI-4, SRP, and SAS Response IU format.

Is it ever possible for both the RSP_LEN and SNS_LEN bits to be set.

I do not think it is because if RSP_LEN is set then the STATUS field is
ignored. If the STATUS is ignored then is it even possible to interpret
sense data? I do not know about the response values associated with
FCP_DATA (in FCP) but all other responses either prevent the command
|from being accepted by the target or are task management responses. None
of these cases have sense data.

The second question is for what STATUS codes is auto-sense data allowed?

CHECK CONDITION = yes
GOOD = ????
All Others = disallowed.

What is the answer for GOOD and does anyone know of a reason to send
sense data for the other status codes? Is it REQUIRED for CHECK
CONDITION?

Bill Galloway
BREA Technologies, Inc.
P: (281) 530-3063
F: (281) 988-0358
BillG at breatech.com

*
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org





*
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org