Reserved field validation

Pat LaVarre p.lavarre at IEEE.org
Mon May 30 08:34:47 PDT 2005


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* Pat LaVarre <p.lavarre at ieee.org>
*
> Application clients could be a fair bit smarter with
> information like this (assuming it is accurate).
> I hope SCSI device firmware folks are reading ...

Curious remark.

1) From my perspective, the main obstacle to more rapid progress in 
places like this is the absence of host folk - to my eye, we seem awash 
with device firmware folk like me, all agreeing with each other over 
how mystically buggy the hosts are.  Yes, many SCSI device firmware 
folk are lurking here.  (Though how many SPI vs. FireWire vs. USB vs. 
ATAPI vs. SATAPI etc. etc. etc. is harder to know.)

2) Just now, I missed the argument for why a device should respond to 
SPC-2 CmdDt set.  Also I missed the argument for why a device should 
respond other than SK ASC = x 5 20 Unknown Op to the op that is "REPORT 
SUPPORTED OPERATION CODES".  What user experience changes if the device 
adds the cost of these features?  Why should the customer pay for this 
enhancement?

Curiously yours (and likely to be quiet while traveling),

*
* 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