SBC 3r21 Verification of a table in the spec

Penokie, George George.Penokie at lsi.com
Wed May 19 14:09:54 PDT 2010


* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* "Penokie, George" <George.Penokie at lsi.com>
*
Scott,
It is not an error and verify is very different especially when BYTCHK is set
to one. 
There are 3 tables that apply when BYTCHK is set to one. The first one
matches what you would expect for the data being read from the media (i.e., a
READ), the second matches what you would expect for the data being sent from
the application client (i.e., a WRITE). The third has no corresponding action
that relates to READs or WRITEs as it is the behavior of a byte-by-byte
compare of the protection fields. That is why the column that has the shalls
in it is labeled Byte-by-byte Comparison.
The rules for what table to use when are listed above the tables (note the
table numbers are different as I am used SBC-4 r22):
If the BYTCHK bit is set to one, then, for any mapped LBA specified by the
command, the device server shall:
a) perform a byte-by-byte comparison of user data read from the medium and
user data transferred from the data-out buffer;
b) check protection information read from the medium based on the VRPROTECT
field as described in table 85;
c) check protection information transferred from the data-out buffer based on
the VRPROTECT field as described in table 86; and
d) perform a byte-by-byte comparison of protection information read from the
medium and transferred from the data-out buffer based on the VRPROTECT field
as described in table 87.
Also, there is an error in that table that will be fixed in revision 23. (See
10-137) but it has nothing to do with your question.
Bye for now, 
George Penokie
LSI Corporation 
3033 41st St. NW 
Suite 100 
Rochester, MN 55901
507-328-9017 
george.penokie at lsi.com
-----Original Message-----
From: owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] On Behalf Of scott taggart
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2010 2:00 PM
To: t10 at t10.org
Subject: SBC 3r21 Verification of a table in the spec
* From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
* scott taggart <taggart at taggarts.org>
*
Hi,
I am looking at table 79 of SBC3r21 and was hoping someone could verify 
that the VRPROTECT description for values 011 and 100 are correct (the 
verify command) are correct.  Specifically, value 011 (0x03) is 
inconsistent with all the other xxProtect values for read. write, etc. 
commands in the spec.  Fro the commands other than verify, 011 is used to 
disable all T10 tag fields.  Why is it different for the verify command?
Thanks,
Scott
*
* 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



More information about the T10 mailing list