solid state mode/ vpd/ event work

Pat LaVarre plavarre at lexarmedia.com
Tue Dec 21 11:22:28 PST 2004


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Pat LaVarre" <plavarre at lexarmedia.com>
*
This is a multi-part message in MIME format.

------_=_NextPart_001_01C4E793.19EAF8D3
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I thought that's what the committee told me to do?  On review now, I =
see
the meeting notes only say "can be represented" or "needs to be
represented".  I took that English as a less confrontational way of
saying "should be represented".  More specifically, I thought I was
being told to:

1) Represent "Data that the host wants to set" "in a Mode page".

2) Represent "unchangeable data" "in a VPD page".

3) Represent "data that needs to be polled (e.g., the health =
indicator)"
"by a Log page (with unit attention)" or "polling with Request Sense",
or "polling with a specialized command".

All that quoted text above comes from what "George Penokie noted" in =
the
CAP WG Nov minutes:
http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/document.04/04-367r1.htm
<http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/document.04/04-367r1.htm>=20

The parts not quoted came from me think I was being shown the light of
the correct way to proceed.  Have I misunderstood?  Help?

Thanks again in advance, Pat LaVarre

-----Original Message-----
From: owner-t10 at t10.org on behalf of Banther, Michael
Sent: Mon 12/20/2004 3:28 AM
To: t10 at t10.org
Subject: RE: solid state mode/ vpd/ event work

I do not understand your comment below, 'By inventing a new use for =
EVPD
....'  Do you intend to define a new VPD page to hold the 'read-only
descriptive data?'

Regards,
Michael Banther
Hewlett-Packard Ltd.
Telephone +44 (117) 312-9503


-----Original Message-----
From: owner-t10 at t10.org [ mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org
<mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org> ] On Behalf Of Pat
LaVarre
Sent: 17 December 2004 17:36
To: t10 at t10.org
Subject: solid state mode/ vpd/ event work

* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Pat LaVarre" <plavarre at lexarmedia.com>
*
Hello again, remember Me?  We've now volunteered me to redraft the
(04-362r0.pdf from Lexar) proposal for vpd/ mode/ etc. definitions that
help the host tune its use of solid-state storage.  I hope to see ya'll
in person at the next CAP WG.

I'm working face to face with people who attended the November CAP WG,
also from the written minutes that I quote below.  For example, I plan
to begin by answering the request to divide the solid-state data into
three categories: a) rewritable settings data, b) read-only descriptive
data, and c) pollable event data.

But if I may, I'd first like to take a moment to confirm I understand
the overall approach.  I hear we the committee saying Four things:

---

1) Massively distributed hosts may choose to adopt this new standard by
beginning with the negligible risk of trying to fetch the newly =
standard
solid-state mode page, from any PDT x 0E 07 05 04 00 device.

2) With devices that do not make the new page available, the system =
will
survive as it already does when the host looks for other mode pages =
with
less than universal support, such as the code x05 HDD C:H:S page or the
x2A C/DVD media compatibility page.

3) After confirming a particular device does make the new page
available, the host may proceed to fetch the read-only descriptive data
by trying op x12 INQUIRY with the byte 1 mask x01 EVPD bit of the CDB
set.  The host may alter the rewritable settings via Mode Select, in
particular choosing to enable the new unit attention or not.  =
Thereafter
the host may poll for events.

4) By inventing a new use for EVPD and yet another form of polling, we
might break (intrinsically fragile) opaque bridge chips, but that's a
cost the device folk who wish to establish this new standard can agree
to pay before shipping a device that does make the new page available.

---

Is that our thinking?

Thanks in advance, hope this helps, Pat LaVarre
http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/members.txt
<http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/members.txt>=20

--- Background ---

http://t10.org <http://t10.org>=20

http://t10.org/t10_mins.htm <http://t10.org/t10_mins.htm>=20

04-367r1 Minutes of CAP Working Group - Nov 9-10, 2004
http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/document.04/04-367r1.htm
<http://www.t10.org/ftp/t10/document.04/04-367r1.htm>=20

5.3.3  SBC-2: Proposal for USB Solid State Drive Mode Sense
specification (04-362r0) [Furuhjelm]
ftp://ftp.t10.org/t10/document.04/04-362r0.pdf
<ftp://ftp.t10.org/t10/document.04/04-362r0.pdf>=20

Steffen Hellmold presented a proposal for defining a mode page for USB
solid-state drives (04-362r0). The group recommended using a VPD page
instead of a mode page for most of the proposed data, as well as other
changes in the proposal.

George Penokie noted that the proposal contains three types data:


o      Unchangeable data that can be represented in a VPD page

o      Data that the host wants to set that can be represented in a =
Mode
page

o      Data that needs to be polled (e.g., the health indicator) which
needs to be represented by a Log page (with unit attention), polling
with Request Sense, or polling with a specialized command

Steffen agreed to prepare a revised proposal for consideration at the
next meeting.

...

---

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



------_=_NextPart_001_01C4E793.19EAF8D3
Content-Type: text/html;
	charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 3.2//EN">

 RE: solid state mode/ vpd/ event work I thought that's what the committee told me to = do?  On review now, I see the meeting notes only say ;can be = represented; or ;needs to be represented;.  I took = that English as a less confrontational way of saying ;should be = represented;.  More specifically, I thought I was being told = to:
 
1) Represent ;Data that the host wants to set; ;in a = Mode page;.
 
2) Represent ;unchangeable data; ;in a VPD = page;.
 
3) Represent ;data that needs to be polled (e.g., the health = indicator); ;by a Log page (with unit attention); or = ;polling with Request Sense;, or ;polling with a = specialized command;.
 
All that quoted text above comes from what ;George Penokie = noted; in the CAP WG Nov minutes:
 http://www.= t10.org/ftp/t10/document.04/04-367r1.htm
 
The parts not quoted came from me think I was being shown the light of = the correct way to proceed.  Have I misunderstood?  Help?
 
Thanks again in advance, Pat LaVarre
 
-----Original Message-----
 From: owner-t10 at t10.org on behalf of Banther, Michael
 Sent: Mon 12/20/2004 3:28 AM
 To: t10 at t10.org
 Subject: RE: solid state mode/ vpd/ event work
 
I do not understand your comment below, 'By inventing a new use for = EVPD
 ....'  Do you intend to define a new VPD page to hold the = 'read-only
 descriptive data?'
 
Regards,
 Michael Banther
 Hewlett-Packard Ltd.
 Telephone +44 (117) 312-9503
 

-----Original Message-----
 From: owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] On = Behalf Of Pat
 LaVarre
 Sent: 17 December 2004 17:36
 To: t10 at t10.org
 Subject: solid state mode/ vpd/ event work
 
* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
 * ;Pat LaVarre; <plavarre at lexarmedia.com>
 *
 Hello again, remember Me?  We've now volunteered me to redraft = the
 (04-362r0.pdf from Lexar) proposal for vpd/ mode/ etc. definitions = that
 help the host tune its use of solid-state storage.  I hope to see = ya'll
 in person at the next CAP WG.
 
I'm working face to face with people who attended the November CAP = WG,
 also from the written minutes that I quote below.  For example, I = plan
 to begin by answering the request to divide the solid-state data = into
 three categories: a) rewritable settings data, b) read-only = descriptive
 data, and c) pollable event data.
 
But if I may, I'd first like to take a moment to confirm I = understand
 the overall approach.  I hear we the committee saying Four = things:
 
---
 
1) Massively distributed hosts may choose to adopt this new standard = by
 beginning with the negligible risk of trying to fetch the newly = standard
 solid-state mode page, from any PDT x 0E 07 05 04 00 device.
 
2) With devices that do not make the new page available, the system = will
 survive as it already does when the host looks for other mode pages = with
 less than universal support, such as the code x05 HDD C:H:S page or = the
 x2A C/DVD media compatibility page.
 
3) After confirming a particular device does make the new page
 available, the host may proceed to fetch the read-only descriptive = data
 by trying op x12 INQUIRY with the byte 1 mask x01 EVPD bit of the CDB set.  The host may alter the rewritable settings via Mode Select, = in
 particular choosing to enable the new unit attention or not.  = Thereafter
 the host may poll for events.
 
4) By inventing a new use for EVPD and yet another form of polling, = we
 might break (intrinsically fragile) opaque bridge chips, but that's = a
 cost the device folk who wish to establish this new standard can = agree
 to pay before shipping a device that does make the new page = available.
 
---
 
Is that our thinking?
 
Thanks in advance, hope this helps, Pat LaVarre
 http://www.t10.org/ftp/t= 10/members.txt
 
--- Background ---
 
http://t10.org
 
http://t10.org/t10_mins.htm
= 
04-367r1 Minutes of CAP Working Group - Nov 9-10, 2004
 http://www.= t10.org/ftp/t10/document.04/04-367r1.htm
 
5.3.3  SBC-2: Proposal for USB Solid State Drive Mode Sense
 specification (04-362r0) [Furuhjelm]
 ftp://ftp.t10.or= g/t10/document.04/04-362r0.pdf
 
Steffen Hellmold presented a proposal for defining a mode page for = USB
 solid-state drives (04-362r0). The group recommended using a VPD = page
 instead of a mode page for most of the proposed data, as well as = other
 changes in the proposal.
 
George Penokie noted that the proposal contains three types data:
 

o      Unchangeable data that can be = represented in a VPD page
 
o      Data that the host wants to set that = can be represented in a Mode
 page
 
o      Data that needs to be polled (e.g., the = health indicator) which
 needs to be represented by a Log page (with unit attention), = polling
 with Request Sense, or polling with a specialized command
 
Steffen agreed to prepare a revised proposal for consideration at = the
 next meeting.
 
...
 
---
 
*
 * For T10 Reflector information, send a message with
 * 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org
 
------_=_NextPart_001_01C4E793.19EAF8D3--




More information about the T10 mailing list