Command Deadline Timeout Change

Paul Suhler Paul.Suhler at hgst.com
Tue Aug 19 10:18:26 PDT 2014


Formatted message: <a href="http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=r&f=r1408190_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</a>

During an internal discussion yesterday, it was suggested that I simplify the
proposal by having deadlines only apply to the READ(32) and WRITE(32)
commands, because those have some reserved bytes, one of which could be used
to replicate the ICC field in the READ / WRITE FPDMA QUEUED commands.  This
would have advantages:
1)	Simplified by no longer piggybacking the timeout value on the
priority feature.
2)	Allows a different timeout per command (rather than per priority)
At least one other company had expressed an interest in this functionality;
is it acceptable to have this only for the two commands?
Thanks,
Paul
Paul A. Suhler, PhD
Research Staff Member
HGST Research
paul.suhler at hgst.com
o: 949-476-1180 x275448
m: 949-241-6443
3001 Daimler St.
Santa Ana, CA 92705-5812
www.hgst.com<<a href="http://www.hgst.com/&gt">http://www.hgst.com/&gt;



More information about the T10 mailing list