Preempting in Persistent Reservations and other questions on Persistent Reservations

Kevin D Butt kdbutt at us.ibm.com
Tue Feb 10 18:07:57 PST 2004


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Kevin D Butt <kdbutt at us.ibm.com>
*
This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--=_alternative 000B6C3107256E37_=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"


Burn, 

03-167r2 was approved and Element scope reservations have been removed.
All reservations are now at the LUN level. 

Regards,

Kevin D. Butt
Fibre Channel & SCSI Architect, IBM Tape Microcode, 
6TYA, 9000 S. Rita Rd., Tucson, AZ  85744
Tie-line 321; Office: 520-799-5280, Lab: 799-5751, Fax: 799-4138, Email:
kdbutt at us.ibm.com 



	Burn Alting <burn at goldweb.com.au> 
Sent by: owner-t10 at t10.org 


02/10/2004 03:50 PM 
        
        To:        t10 at t10.org 
        cc:         
        Subject:        Preempting in Persistent Reservations and other
questions on        Persistent Reservations 





* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Burn Alting <burn at goldweb.com.au>
*
Hi Peoples,

I am implementing SCSI Persistent Reservations as per the T10/1416-D
Revision 16 draft. I noticed under Preempting reservations/registrations
the action
                "Process tasks as defined in 5.6.1; and "
in a number of situations - just before I may need to set unit
attentions.

Do I take this to mean, I am to allow any 'outstanding commands'
(tasks), which may have started execution prior to the Persistent
Reserve preempt command commencing, to complete PRIOR to setting Unit
Attentions on relevant initiators?

Also, once I complete my implementation, it would be exceedingly useful
to test it's functionality. I have some GPL code for Linux
(scsi_reserve-0.7-7.src.rpm) but it assumes one knows how to drive the
command appropriately. Are there any other tools I could use to test my
implementation?

Lastly, I noticed a posting about the possible removal of Element Scope.
Can I assume, that in the not to distant future, Persistent Reservations
will only deal with the complete LUN and no extent based scheme will be
required?


Thanks in advance
-- 
Burn Alting <burn at goldweb.com.au>

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




--=_alternative 000B6C3107256E37_=
Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii"


<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Burn,</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">03-167r2 was approved and Element scope reservations have been removed. &nbsp;All reservations are now at the LUN level.</font>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="sans-serif">Regards,<br>
<br>
Kevin D. Butt<br>
Fibre Channel &amp; SCSI Architect, IBM Tape Microcode, <br>
6TYA, 9000 S. Rita Rd., Tucson, AZ &nbsp;85744<br>
Tie-line 321; Office: 520-799-5280, Lab: 799-5751, Fax: 799-4138, Email: kdbutt at us.ibm.com</font>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<table width=100%>
<tr valign=top>
<td>
<td><font size=1 face="sans-serif"><b>Burn Alting <burn at goldweb.com.au&gt;</b></font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">Sent by: owner-t10 at t10.org</font>
<p><font size=1 face="sans-serif">02/10/2004 03:50 PM</font>
<br>
<td><font size=1 face="Arial">&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; </font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; To: &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;t10 at t10.org</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; cc: &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;</font>
<br><font size=1 face="sans-serif">&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; Subject: &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Preempting in Persistent Reservations and other questions on &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;Persistent Reservations</font>
<br></table>
<br>
<br>
<br><font size=2 face="Courier New">* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:<br>
* Burn Alting <burn at goldweb.com.au&gt;<br>
*<br>
Hi Peoples,<br>
<br>
I am implementing SCSI Persistent Reservations as per the T10/1416-D<br>
Revision 16 draft. I noticed under Preempting reservations/registrations<br>
the action<br>
 &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp; "Process tasks as defined in 5.6.1; and "<br>
in a number of situations - just before I may need to set unit<br>
attentions.<br>
<br>
Do I take this to mean, I am to allow any 'outstanding commands'<br>
(tasks), which may have started execution prior to the Persistent<br>
Reserve preempt command commencing, to complete PRIOR to setting Unit<br>
Attentions on relevant initiators?<br>
<br>
Also, once I complete my implementation, it would be exceedingly useful<br>
to test it's functionality. I have some GPL code for Linux<br>
(scsi_reserve-0.7-7.src.rpm) but it assumes one knows how to drive the<br>
command appropriately. Are there any other tools I could use to test my<br>
implementation?<br>
<br>
Lastly, I noticed a posting about the possible removal of Element Scope.<br>
Can I assume, that in the not to distant future, Persistent Reservations<br>
will only deal with the complete LUN and no extent based scheme will be<br>
required?<br>
<br>
<br>
Thanks in advance<br>
-- <br>
Burn Alting <burn at goldweb.com.au&gt;<br>
<br>
*<br>
* For T10 Reflector information, send a message with<br>
* 'info t10' (no quotes) in the message body to majordomo at t10.org<br>
</font>
<br>
<br>
--=_alternative 000B6C3107256E37_=--




More information about the T10 mailing list