Download microcode proposals

Gerry Houlder gerry.houlder at
Fri Jun 6 10:39:23 PDT 2014

Formatted message: <a href="">HTML-formatted message</a>

Curtis has read 14-150 more carefully than I did. If 14-150 is about
changing the MODE field (not the MODE SPECIFIC field) to a different value
than the MODE field of the first download command in a sequence of download
commands, then I agree with his effort to call this out as an error
(Seagate products would report an error for this). This is different than
the MODE SPECIFIC field use case I was thinking of in my previous email.
On Fri, Jun 6, 2014 at 12:13 PM, Ballard, Curtis C (HP Storage) <
curtis.ballard at> wrote:
>  It appears to me that the download ‘modes’ may be getting mixed up.  I
> don’t see anything in 14-150r0 that addresses use of the MODE SPECIFIC
> field, only the MODE field.  It is possible that similar issues exist for
> the MODE SPECIFIC field but those do not appear to be discussed in
> HP has products handle the MODE field similar to the way IBM describes
> their handling of the MODE SPECIFIC field.  Only valid MODE field settings
> are allowed in the initial command and any subsequent intermediate
> commands.  The MODE field setting in the final command determines the
> activation method.
> The explanation provided by one developer was that since they could find
> no method in SPC for determining which segment was the final segment they
> chose to begin the transfer with a mode that does not save the firmware and
> use a mode that has a save and activate rule for the final segment to
> notify the device server that it should now save and prepare for activation
> as specified.
> Curtis Ballard
> Hewlett-Packard Company
> +1 970 898 3013 / Tel
> Curtis.Ballard at / Email
> Fort Collins, CO
> *From:* owner-t10 at [mailto:owner-t10 at] *On Behalf Of *Kevin
> D Butt
> *Sent:* Friday, June 6, 2014 10:44 AM
> *To:* Gerry Houlder; Bill Martin-SSI
> *Cc:* owner-t10 at; T10 Reflector
> *Subject:* Re: Download microcode proposals
> Bill,
> IBM has products that use the MODE SPECIFIC field setting on the last
> segment and uses that regardless of what was set in previous segments
> (though  we do reject invalid values at all times).  Therefore, using the
> value in the first segment and forcing a reject for subsequent non-matching
> values would make IBM devices non-compliant.
> IBM votes for using the value in the last segment and not requiring
> consistent values throughout all the segments.  In reality, only the last
> segment causes an action, all the others are just sending portions of the
> image.
> Thanks,
> Kevin D. Butt
> SCSI Architect, Tape Firmware, T10 Standards
> Data Protection & Retention
> MS 6TYA, 9000 S. Rita Rd., Tucson, AZ 85744
> Tel: 520-799-5280
> Fax: 520-799-2723 (T/L:321)
> Email address: kdbutt at

More information about the T10 mailing list