Ex Parte Arroyo et al

Patent Trial and Appeal Board

Sep 24, 2018

14087330 (P.T.A.B. Sep. 24, 2018)

UNITED STA TES p A TENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
APPLICATION NO. FILING DATE FIRST NAMED INVENTOR
14/087,330 11/22/2013
139308 7590 09/26/2018
IBM Corporation
Intellectural Property Law Department Poughkeepsie
2455 South Road, MIS P386, Bldg. 008-2
Poughkeepsie, NY 12601
Jesse P. Arroyo
UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE
United States Patent and Trademark Office
Address: COMMISSIONER FOR PATENTS
P.O. Box 1450
Alexandria, Virginia 22313-1450
www .uspto.gov
ATTORNEY DOCKET NO. CONFIRMATION NO.
ROC920130185US1 3206
EXAMINER
MILLS, PAUL V
ART UNIT PAPER NUMBER
2196
NOTIFICATION DATE DELIVERY MODE
09/26/2018 ELECTRONIC
Please find below and/or attached an Office communication concerning this application or proceeding.
The time period for reply, if any, is set in the attached communication.
Notice of the Office communication was sent electronically on above-indicated "Notification Date" to the
following e-mail address(es):
poiplaw2@us.ibm.com
jpenningtonatty@cs.com
PTOL-90A (Rev. 04/07)
UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE
BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD
Ex parte JESSE P. ARROYO, BRIAN E. BAKKE,
ELLEN M. BAUMAN, ROBERT GALBRAITH, CHARLES
S. GRAHAM, and TIMOTHY J. SCHIMKE
Appeal2017-011797
Application 14/087 ,330
Technology Center 2100
Before JASON V. MORGAN, JEREMY J. CURCURI, and
IRVINE. BRANCH, Administrative Patent Judges.
CURCURI, Administrative Patent Judge.
DECISION ON APPEAL
Appellants appeal under 35 U.S.C. § 134(a) from the Examiner's
rejection of claims 12, 13, and 17-20. Final Act. 1. Appeal number 2017-
011857 (App. No. 14/840,351) is related. App. Br. 5. We have jurisdiction
under 35 U.S.C. § 6(b).
Claims 12, 13, and 17-20 are rejected under 35 U.S.C. § 103 as
obvious over Goggin et al. (US 2011/0179414 Al, published July 21, 2011)
and Brownlow et al. (US 2012/0159245 Al, published June 21, 2012). See
Appeal2017-011797
Application 14/087 ,330
Final Act. 6-7 (rejecting claims 13, 17-20), Advisory Act. 1 2---6 (rejecting
claim 12).
We affirm.
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Appellants' invention relates to "implementing dynamic virtualization
of a Single Root Input/Output Virtualization (SRIOV) capable Serial
Attached Small-Computer System-Interface (SAS) adapter." Spec. ,r 1.
Claim 12 is illustrative and reproduced below:
12. A system for implementing dynamic virtualization
of a Single Root Input/Output Virtualization (SRIOV) capable
Serial Attached SCSI (SAS) adapter comprising:
the SRIOV SAS adapter provided in a computer system,
the SRIOV SAS adapter comprising a plurality of virtual
functions (VFs) for sharing by multiple system partitions, each
VF enabled to be assigned to multiple system partitions and
multiple VFs enabled to be assigned to a single system
partition, a physical function (PF) for configuration and
management of the VFs, and a plurality of Host Bus Adapter
(HBA) resources to be assigned to a respective VF;
a plurality of said system partitions sharing the SRIOV
SAS adapter; each said system partition including at least one
processor; and a VF driver;
a hypervisor coupled to the plurality of system partitions
and the PF, said hypervisor storing a configuration interface
and including a PF driver associated with the PF wherein, when
activating a system partition, said hypervisor first assigning
associated resources with a respective VF in the SRIOV SAS
adapter using the PF driver; and
a resource manager and a partition supervisor for
implementing dynamic virtualization of the SRIOV SAS
1 All references to "Advisory Act." are to the Advisory Action of March 6,
2017.
2
Appeal2017-011797
Application 14/087 ,330
adapter, said resource manager and said partition supervisor
including control code tangibly embodied in a non-transitory
machine readable medium;
wherein said resource manager runs an assignment
process each time the SRIOV SAS adapter is reset, assigns
HBA resources to said VFs persistently remembers the
assignments, and communicates the assignments to said
partition supervisor, each of said plurality of said HBA
resources being assigned to one or more of said VFs, and only
respectively assigned VFs enabled to access an associated
assigned HBA resource;
wherein the SRIOV SAS adapter receives assignment
configuration communicated from said resource manager via
said PF, disables configuration and management Application
Programming Interfaces (APis) on the VFs, and enables
configuration and management Application Programming
Interfaces (APis) only on the PF; and
wherein said system partitions send Read and Write
commands via respectively assigned VFs without any
intermediary, and system partition read/write performance for
each VF being substantially equivalent to performance achieved
for a dedicated HBA.
PRINCIPLES OF LAW
We review the appealed rejections for error based upon the issues
identified by Appellants, and in light of the arguments and evidence
produced thereon. Ex parte Frye, 94 USPQ2d 1072, 107 5 (BP AI 2010)
(precedential).
ANALYSIS
We have reviewed the Examiner's rejections in light of Appellants'
arguments (see generally App. Br. and Reply Br.) contending that the
Examiner has erred.
3
Appeal2017-011797
Application 14/087 ,330
We disagree with Appellants' arguments as to the obviousness
rejection of claims 12, 13, and 17-20 over Goggin and Brownlow.
We adopt as our own ( 1) the findings and reasons set forth by the
Examiner in the action from which this appeal is taken and (2) the reasons
set forth by the Examiner in the Examiner's Answer in response to
Appellants' Appeal Brief. We concur with the conclusions reached by the
Examiner. We highlight the following for emphasis.
In particular, the Examiner finds Goggin teaches all limitations of
claim 12 except for "wherein said resource manager runs an assignment
process each time the SRIOV SAS adapter is reset"; the Examiner finds
Brownlow teaches "wherein said resource manager runs an assignment
process each time the SRIOV SAS adapter is reset." See Advisory Act. 2---6;
see also Ans. 3-14, 16. The Examiner reasons "[i]t would have been
obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art at the time the invention was filed
to modify the SR-IOV implementation of Goggin in accordance with the
teachings of Brownlow to improve its error handling and recovery
capabilities." Advisory Act. 6 (citing Brownlow ,r,r 12-13, 143, and 150);
see also Ans. 16.
In particular, Appellants argue the following:
1.
Applicant respectively submits that the Examiner
incorrectly maintains that Goggin discloses a physical function
(PF) for configuration and management of the VFs a hypervisor
(virtualization intermediary) storing a configuration interface
and including a PF driver associated with the PF citing FIGS. 2,
3, 4A and 4B, and paragraphs 0015, 0030, 0041 and 0047.
App. Br. 20; see also App. Br. 20-21, Reply Br. 3.
11.
4
Appeal2017-011797
Application 14/087 ,330
Applicant does not require construction of such a VF
driver 321 as taught by Goggin. Only Applicant teaches and
claims a system including a physical function (PF) for
configuration and management of the VFs and said hypervisor
storing a configuration interface and including a PF driver
associated with the PF wherein, when activating a system
partition, said hypervisor first assigning associated resources
with a respective VF in the SRIOV SAS adapter using the PF
driver, and the total teachings of Goggin and the Brownlow fail
to suggest such a system.
App. Br. 22; see also Reply Br. 3--4.
111.
For the limitations that said resource manager, runs an
assignment process each time the SRIOV SAS adapter is reset,
assigning HBA resources to said VFs persistently remembering
the assignments, and communicating the assignments to said
partition supervisor, the Examiner cites FIGS. 3, 4A-4D,
paragraphs 0045, 0050, 0051, 0056, 0059, and 0062 of Goggin.
Applicant respectfully submits that the virtualization
intermediary mapping information created by Goggin with the
SCSI target emulation module 322 that maps virtual SCSI logical
units to physical SCSI targets and physical SCSI logical units
located in storage 308 providing the mapping information
resident on the VF 316, does not suggest, and is not equivalent
to said resource manager that runs an assignment process each
time the SRIOV SAS adapter is reset, assigning HBA resources
to said VFs persistently remembering the assignments, as taught
and claimed by Applicant.
App. Br. 24; see also Reply Br. 4--6.
iv. "Applicant respectfully submits that only Applicants teach
disabling configuration and management Application Programming
Interfaces (APis) on the VFs, and enabling configuration and management
Application Programming Interfaces (APis) only on the PF." App. Br. 24;
see also App. Br. 24--26, Reply Br. 7-10.
5
Appeal2017-011797
Application 14/087 ,330
V.
The total teachings of Goggin and Brownlow provide no
motivation, suggestion or teaching to support the Examiner's
proposed modification to provide a resource manager, that runs
an assignment process each time the SRIOV SAS adapter is
reset, assigns HBA resources to said VFs persistently remembers
the assignments, and communicates the assignments to said
partition supervisor, as taught and claimed by Applicant. The
combined total teachings of Goggin and the Brownlow
references provide no motivation, suggestion or teaching to
support the Examiner's proposed modification and would not
achieve these claimed features of disabling configuration and
management Application Programming Interfaces (APis) on the
VFs, and enabling configuration and management Application
Programming Interfaces (APis) only on the PF.
App. Br. 27.
We are persuaded by the Examiner's findings, which we have adopted
as our own.
The Examiner's findings with respect to the argued limitations are
supported by evidence drawn from the record. Appellants' arguments
characterize the cited prior art, but fail to adequately explain why the
Examiner's findings are incorrect. Thus, we do not see any errors in the
Examiner's findings.
For example, Goggin discloses a physical function for configuration
and management of multiple virtual functions. See Advisory Act. 2 ( citing
Goggin ,r,r 29--32, 36, 39--41, 45, Figs. 2, 3). Goggin discloses "A PF is used
to control the physical services of the device and to manage individual VFs."
Goggin ,r 31. Goggin discloses "A physical function, such as PF 222 in this
example that is associated with a virtual function 228 is responsible for
allocating, resetting, and de-allocating that virtual function and the PCI
resources required by that virtual function." Goggin ,r 32.
6
Appeal2017-011797
Application 14/087 ,330
For example, Goggin discloses a hypervisor storing a configuration
interface and including a PF driver associated with the PF. See Advisory
Act. 3 (citing Goggin ,r,r 15, 30, 41, 47, Figs. 2, 3, 4A--4B). Goggin discloses
"A PF driver 318 communicates information between the PF 314 and the
virtualization intermediary 31 O." Goggin ,r 41.
For example, Goggin discloses when activating a system partition, the
hypervisor first assigns associated resources with a respective VF in the
SRIOV SAS adapter using the PF driver. See Advisory Act. 3 ( citing
Goggin ,r,r 60-62, Fig. 4C). Goggin discloses "the HSA 320 requests to the
virtual SCSI target emulation module 322 to forward a virtual target
emulation mapping 317 comprising the first and second mapping metadata
361 and 363 to the VF 316 corresponding to the VM 304 that is being
instantiated." Goggin ,r 62.
For example, Goggin discloses wherein the resource manager assigns
HBA resources to the VFs, persistently remembers the assignments, and
communicates the assignments to the partition supervisor. See Advisory
Act. 3 (citing Goggin ,r,r 50-51, 56, 59, 62, Figs. 3, 4A--4D). Goggin
discloses "during the resource provisioning phase, the above-mentioned
virtual port is allocated and persistently associated with the VF 316."
Goggin ,r 54; see also Ans. 8 (citing Goggin ,r 54).
For example, Brownlow discloses the resource manager runs an
assignment process each time the SRIOV SAS adapter is reset. See
Advisory Act. 5---6 (citing Brownlow ,r,r 145-146, 161-162, 166, 171).
Brownlow discloses "[i]f recovery involves a physical function or virtual
function function level reset (FLR), or an adapter reset, the physical function
reconfigures the SRIOV capabilities of each physical function, rebinds, and
7
Appeal2017-011797
Application 14/087 ,330
reinitializes resources previously bound to the physical functions and virtual
functions." Brownlow ,r 171.
For example, Goggin discloses disabling configuration and
management Application Programming Interfaces (APis) on the VFs, and
enabling configuration and management Application Programming
Interfaces (APis) only on the PF. See Advisory Act. 3--4 (citing Goggin
,r,r 42--43, 65, 70-71, Figs. 4C--4D). Goggin discloses "the SCSI target
emulation located on the VF 316 can be simplified does not have to service
nonread/write commands." Goggin ,r 71.
The Examiner's reasons to combine the references are rational and
supported by evidence drawn from the record. Appellants' arguments fail to
adequately explain why the Examiner's reasons are incorrect. Thus, we do
not see any errors in the Examiner's reasons to combine the references. See
Advisory Act. 6 (citing Brownlow ,r,r 12-13, 143, 150); see also Ans. 16.
Brownlow discloses "Embodiments of the invention provide for simpler and
less error prone error handling." Brownlow ,r 143.
We, therefore, sustain the obviousness rejection of claim 12.
We also sustain the obviousness rejections of claims 13, 18, and 19,
which are not separately argued with particularity.
Regarding claim 17, claim 1 7 recites "Read/Write Application
Programming Interfaces (APis) being enabled on respective VFs of the
SRIOV SAS adapter." The Examiner finds Goggin teaches the subject
matter of claim 17. Final Act. 7 ( citing Goggin ,r,r 43, 70-71 ); see also Ans.
15.
Appellants argue Goggin and Brownlow do not teach the subject
matter of claim 17. See App. Br. 27-29; see also Reply Br. 10-11.
8
Appeal2017-011797
Application 14/087 ,330
We are persuaded by the Examiner's findings, which we have adopted
as our own. Appellants' arguments fail to adequately explain why the
Examiner's findings are incorrect.
Goggin discloses "[i]n particular SCSI Read Commands and SCSI
Write Commands with Command Data Blocks (CDBs), forms of IO access
requests, having byte sizes of 6, 10, 12 or 16 are directed to the VF 316 via
the first HSA PCI memory space 311 for direct access to the storage
adapter" Goggin ,r 71. Thus, Goggin teaches the subject matter of claim 17.
We, therefore, sustain the obviousness rejection of claim 17.
Regarding claim 20, claim 20 recites "said hypervisor persistently
storing correlation data associating HBA resources with a specific system
partition." The Examiner finds Goggin teaches the subject matter of claim
20. Final Act. 7 (citing Goggin ,r,r 50-51, 54, 59---60); see also Ans. 15-16.
Appellants argue Goggin and Brownlow do not teach the subject
matter of claim 20. See App. Br. 31-32; see also Reply Br. 11.
We are persuaded by the Examiner's findings, which we have adopted
as our own. Appellants' arguments fail to adequately explain why the
Examiner's findings are incorrect.
Goggin discloses
Also, in the course of instantiating (i.e. creating) a new
virtual machine 304, the provisioning utility 350, allocates one
or more previously created virtual disks (i.e. virtual SCSI logical
units) to such new virtual machine 304. Many, perhaps hundreds
of virtual disks can be allocated to a given virtual machine 304.
Each virtual disk that is allocated to the given virtual machine
304 is assigned a unique virtual address represented by second
363 mapping.
Goggin ,r 59. Thus, Goggin teaches the subject matter of claim 20.
We, therefore, sustain the obviousness rejection of claim 20.
9
Appeal2017-011797
Application 14/087 ,330
ORDER
The Examiner's decision rejecting claims 12, 13, and 17-20 is
affirmed.
No time period for taking any subsequent action in connection with
this appeal maybe extended under 37 C.F.R. § 1.136(a)(l).
AFFIRMED
10