spc4r33: persistent reservations preemtion
leonid.podolny at xtremio.com
Tue Jan 31 08:59:39 PST 2012
Formatted message: <a href="http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=r&f=r1201311_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</a>
You are absolutely right, I forgot to say that all questions refer to
PERSISTENT RESERVE OUT: PREEMPT.
On Tue, Jan 31, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Penokie, George
<George.Penokie at lsi.com>wrote:
> If I understand your questions which are not clear as they do not indicate
> what commands are being issued.
> If the command in your number 1 comment is a PERSISTENT RESERVE OUT
> command with RELEASE service action, then the answer to number 1 is at the
> end of section 126.96.36.199 Releasing and is stated as:
> If there is no persistent reservation or in response to a persistent
> reservation release request from a registered I_T
> nexus that is not a persistent reservation holder (see 5.9.10), the device
> server shall do the following:
> a) not release the persistent reservation, if any;
> b) not remove any registrations; and
> c) complete the command with GOOD status.
> If not then I have no idea what you are asking.
> Your second question is impossible to answer without knowing what command
> is being issued.
> The text under figure 6 in section 188.8.131.52.4 Removing registrations
> describes the case for an invalid SERVICE ACTION RESERVATION KEY:
> If a PERSISTENT RESERVE OUT with a PREEMPT service action or a PREEMPT AND
> ABORT service action
> sets the SERVICE ACTION RESERVATION KEY field to a value that does not
> match any registered reservation key, then
> the device server shall complete the command with RESERVATION CONFLICT
> Bye for now,
> George Penokie
> LSI Corporation
> 3033 41 St NW
> Rochester , MN 55901
> george.penokie at lsi.com
> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-t10 at t10.org [mailto:owner-t10 at t10.org] On Behalf Of Leonid
> Sent: Sunday, January 29, 2012 6:12 AM
> To: t10 at t10.org
> Subject: spc4r33: persistent reservations preemtion
> * From the T10 Reflector (t10 at t10.org), posted by:
> * Leonid Podolny <leonid.podolny at xtremio.com>
> Good day,
> The most recent draft of SPC-4 doesn't seem to address two specific
> scenarios. (Even if it does address these scenarios, it probably
> merits a clarification, because I just can't find a definite answer).
> I fail to understand the desired behavior in the following cases:
> 1) There is no existing persistent reservation and SERVICE ACTION
> RESERVATION KEY is zero. Should the server clean _all_ registrations
> or return RESERVATION CONFLICT?
> 2) There is an existing "All Registrants" reservation and the SERVICE
> ACTION RESERVATION KEY equals the registration key of a requesting
> nexus. Should the server remove the registration of the requesting
> nexus (w/o creating a new reservation) or should it remove
> registrations of all matching nexuses except for the requesting nexus?
> If the answer is the latter, what happens with the reservation?
> In addition, in figure 6, the server is required to validate the
> SERVICE ACTION RESERVATION KEY (the second rhombus at the top left
> corner of the figure). What is the criteria of the validity of the
> SERVICE ACTION RESERVATION KEY?
> * 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