Comment on 14-014r1, Persistent Reserve parameters summary
Ralph.Weber at wdc.com
Wed Jan 8 15:51:53 PST 2014
Formatted message: <a href="http://www.t10.org/cgi-bin/ac.pl?t=r&f=r1401087_f.htm">HTML-formatted message</a>
First, please remember that table x1 provides a summary of the parameters. It
does not define them. The parameters are defined in the cross referenced
* Reserved is intended to mean that the actual definition reserves the
bit or field. In some cases, a comparison is required between the two
subclauses to see this, but it is still the intent.
* Invalid is intended to mean that the cited subclause or the Persistent
Reservations model explicitly defined that a CHECK CONDITION status be
More work may be needed to clarify this, but I am loath to attempt to second
guess exactly what CAP will want.
All the best,
From: owner-t10 at t10.org [owner-t10 at t10.org] on behalf of Gerry Houlder
[gerry.houlder at seagate.com]
Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2014 9:58 AM
To: T10 Reflector
Subject: Comment on 14-014r1, Persistent Reserve parameters summary
I notice that table x1 (part 2 of 2) uses "invalid" as a keyword for some
service action/ parameter combinations and "reserved" for others. It is not
clear from the descriptions in the Persistent Reservation clauses how or if
these keywords are treated differently.
Reserved is a well known keyword that requires the bit to be set to zero and
the target may or may not be required to check the field. However the field
is valid for other service actions, so this suggests that the target is
required to check the field and should terminate the command with illegal
request sense data if it is non-zero. Is this the same interpretation
everyone else has for 'reserved" in this situation?
The description for invalid seems to require the bit to be set to zero and to
terminate the command with illegal request sense data if it is non-zero. This
seems exactly like "reserved" behavior.
I would like to eliminate either invalid or reserved and select one keyword
for all the cases that are listed as invalid or reserved in table x1. If we
really think the handling should be different for invalid versus reserved,
then i would like to see a description (e.g., table footnote in table x1) of
how they are different.
More information about the T10