SORT BY:

LIST ORDER
THREAD
AUTHOR
SUBJECT


SEARCH

IPS HOME


    [Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

    Re: CDB/PDU inconsistencies and residual counts


    • To: "Dean Scoville" <dean.scoville@qlogic.com>
    • Subject: Re: CDB/PDU inconsistencies and residual counts
    • From: dcuddihy@attotech.com
    • Date: Tue, 22 Jul 2003 13:50:56 -0400
    • Cc: ips@ece.cmu.edu
    • Content-type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
    • Delivered-To: ips-outgoing@sos.ece.cmu.edu
    • Delivered-To: ips-outgoing@ece.cmu.edu
    • Delivered-To: ips@sos.ece.cmu.edu
    • Delivered-To: ips@ece.cmu.edu
    • Sender: owner-ips@ece.cmu.edu

    
    Dean,
    
    I'm taking my queues from our FCP experience, but it seems to me that the
    residual should be the difference between the iSCSI and SCSI layers.
    
    > For example, suppose an initiator sends a 4 block SCSI Read command
    > but for some reason thinks the block size is 1024 bytes when in actuality
    
    > the disk has 512 byte blocks. The SCSI Command PDU would have an
    >"expected data transfer length" of value of 4096 bytes, but the target
    would
    > actually return 2048 bytes (based on the true block size). Should the
    target
    > set the underflow bit and return a residual count (based on the iSCSI
    PDU),
    > or should it return no underflow and no residual count (based on the SCSI
    CDB)?
    
    In this case it is a 2048 byte underflow.
    
    
    > Another example would be if the "allocation length" field in the CDB for
    > an Inquiry command doesn't match the "expected data transfer length"
    field
    > in the SCSI Command PDU.
    
    
    That's a pretty cool test case...
    
    
    In most cases where there is an allocation length, the overflow is
    reflectedin the SCSI response, so there's no residual.  (IE if there's more
    data in the inquiry response than the allocation length will allow, just
    report the length in the SCSI response but don't indicate an overflow.)  In
    the case where allocation length would allow for a transfer larger  than
    the "expected data transfer length" at the ISCSI layer this should report
    an overflow  and residual, since everything in the SCSI response could not
    be transferred by the ISCSI layer.
    
    
    btw: Report Luns works similarly, where underflow is reported, but overflow
    is handled by the length field in the SCSI response -- as long as the
    allocation length and the "expected data transfer length" match.
    
    
    regards,
    
    
    David
    
    
    
    
    
    
    David J Cuddihy
    Principal Engineer
    ATTO Technology, Inc.
    http://www.attotech.com/fcbridge.html
    dcuddihy@attotech.com
    
    
    
    
                                                                                                                                                    
                        "Dean Scoville"                                                                                                             
                        <dean.scoville@q       To:     "Julian Satran" <Julian_Satran@il.ibm.com>                                                   
                        logic.com>             cc:     <ips@ece.cmu.edu>                                                                            
                        Sent by:               Subject:     CDB/PDU inconsistencies and residual counts                                             
                        owner-ips@ece.cm                                                                                                            
                        u.edu                                                                                                                       
                                                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                    
                        07/22/03 12:43                                                                                                              
                        PM                                                                                                                          
                                                                                                                                                    
                                                                                                                                                    
    
    
    
    
    Julian,
    The overflow/underflow and residual count values in Data-in and
    SCSI Response PDUs are set by the target based on the expected
    transfer length for the command, but should these values be set based
    on the CDB (SCSI layer) or based on the PDU "expected data transfer length"
    
    field (iSCSI layer)?
    
    
    For example, suppose an initiator sends a 4 block SCSI Read command
    but for some reason thinks the block size is 1024 bytes when in actuality
    the disk has 512 byte blocks. The SCSI Command PDU would have an
    "expected data transfer length" of value of 4096 bytes, but the target
    would
    actually return 2048 bytes (based on the true block size). Should the
    target
    set the underflow bit and return a residual count (based on the iSCSI PDU),
    
    or should it return no underflow and no residual count (based on the SCSI
    CDB)?
    
    
    The question comes up because I was running some iSCSI protocol test
    scripts where the PDU "expected transfer length" and the transfer length
    in the CDB were inconsistent in one of the scripts.
    
    
    Another example would be if the "allocation length" field in the CDB for
    an Inquiry command doesn't match the "expected data transfer length" field
    in the SCSI Command PDU.
    
    
    The script was in error and should be fixed, is there a desired target
    behavior in such situations, given that the CDB fields are not typically
    parsed
    by the iSCSI layer, the SCSI device may know nothing about iSCSI PDUs,
    and some middle-layer may or may not know about both.
    
    
    If the initiator detects that an underflow has occurred, based solely on
    the
    amount of data received and the "expected data transfer field" in the iSCSI
    PDU,
    but the target did not report an underflow or residual count in the SCSI
    response,
    is the initiator allowed/expected to report an underflow to the upper
    layers?
    
    
    Thanks,
    
    
    Dean Scoville
    
    
    
    
    
    
    
    


Home

Last updated: Tue Aug 05 12:46:11 2003
12771 messages in chronological order