Return-Path: X-Sieve: cmu-sieve 2.0 Return-Path: Received: (from majordom@localhost) by ece.cmu.edu (8.11.0/8.10.2) id h1H0Ka025980 for ips-outgoing; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 19:20:36 -0500 (EST) X-Authentication-Warning: ece.cmu.edu: majordom set sender to owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu using -f Received: from mail.ivivity.com ([64.238.111.99]) by ece.cmu.edu (8.11.0/8.10.2) with ESMTP id h1GCZCW02854; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 07:35:13 -0500 (EST) Received: by ATLOPS with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) id <1TWQJG8N>; Sun, 16 Feb 2003 07:34:57 -0500 Message-ID: From: Eddy Quicksall To: Julian Satran Cc: "Ips@Ece.Cmu.Edu (ips@ece.cmu.edu)" , owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu Subject: RE: iSCSI: underrun with a check condition Date: Sun, 16 Feb 2003 07:34:54 -0500 MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----_=_NextPart_001_01C2D5B7.CEDC22E0" Sender: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu Precedence: bulk This message is in MIME format. Since your mail reader does not understand this format, some or all of this message may not be legible. ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D5B7.CEDC22E0 Content-Type: text/plain I'm sorry; I should have been more specific. Let's take a very simple case: I->T READ 1 block T->I Unit Attention (06/29/01) (or BUSY, etc) Since all of the data was not returned, should the U bit be set? Section 10.4.1 does not specify. bit 6 - (U) set for Residual Underflow. In this case, the Residual Count indicates the number of bytes that were not transferred out of the number of bytes that were expected to be transferred. For a bidirectional operation, the Residual Count contains the residual for the write operation. Eddy -----Original Message----- From: Julian Satran [mailto:Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com] Sent: Sunday, February 16, 2003 2:32 AM To: Eddy Quicksall Cc: Ips@Ece.Cmu.Edu (ips@ece.cmu.edu); owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu Subject: Re: iSCSI: underrun with a check condition For some devices and settings the underrun may the cause of the check condition so it certainly should be set whenever appropriate. Julo Eddy Quicksall Sent by: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu 15/02/03 04:57 To "Ips@Ece.Cmu.Edu (ips@ece.cmu.edu)" cc Subject iSCSI: underrun with a check condition Should the target set the U bit when it gives a check condition to a data-in command? Eddy mailto: Eddy_Quicksall@iVivity.com ------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D5B7.CEDC22E0 Content-Type: text/html Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

I'm sorry; I should have been more specific. Let's take a very simple case:

=

I->T READ 1 = block

T->I Unit Attention = (06/29/01<= /font>)

(or = BUSY, etc)

=

Since all of the data was not = returned, should the U bit be set? Section 10.4.1 does not = specify.

=

= bit 6 - (U) set for Residual Underflow. In this = case, the

= Residual Count indicates the number of bytes that were = not

= transferred out of the number of bytes that were = expected to

= be transferred. For a bidirectional operation, the = Residual

= Count contains the residual for the write = operation.

=

Eddy

=

-----Original = Message-----
From: Julian Satran [mailto:Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com]
Sent: Sunday, February = 16, 2003 2:32 AM
To: Eddy Quicksall
Cc: Ips@Ece.Cmu.Edu (ips@ece.cmu.edu); owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu
Subject: Re: iSCSI: = underrun with a check condition

For some devices and settings the underrun may = the cause of the check condition so it certainly should be set whenever appropriate.

Julo

Eddy Quicksall <eddyq@ivivity.com>
Sent by: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu

15/02/03 04:57

To	"Ips@Ece.Cmu.Edu = (ips@ece.cmu.edu)" <ips@ece.cmu.edu>
cc
Subject	iSCSI: underrun with a check = condition

Should the target set the U bit when it gives a check condition = to a data-in command?

Eddy

mailto: = Eddy_Quicksall@iVivity.com

------_=_NextPart_001_01C2D5B7.CEDC22E0--