Re: SCE-MI 1.0/1.1: Input ready propagation and reset

Hi John,

thanks for your reply.

> I don't see where the paragraph at the top of page 54 implies
> it is OK to send messages during reset.

It implies it at least for output messages by talking about what
the value of cycle stamp is during reset.  If it is not allowed
to send output messages during reset it does not make sense to
specify what value cycle stamp should have during reset since it
would have no user-visible impact.  I remember when we were
talking about this at one meeting.  I remember Duaine being
reluctant to restrict message transfer during reset.

> And the NOTE: below the figure clearly discourages it though
> you're right it does imply it is allowed. I would be in favor
> of disallowing it altogether. I'm not sure why the
> NOTE: was being wishy washy about it.

We added the note because we wanted to keep the door open for
this kind of usage.  I'd like to revisit this and see if we can
agree to disallow transfer of messages during reset.  Duaine,
do you still have reservations about disallowing message transfer
during reset?

> I think the spec somewhere says that if an output
> message is sent on an unbound port, it is simpy
> ignored. But the user can easily avoid a race
> by simply making sure all the output ports that
> he cares about are bound some time between SceMi::Init()
> and the first call to ::SerivceLoop().

I agree.

Per