DETAILED ACTION
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
This office action is in response to application 18/937,220 filed on 11/5/2024.
The preliminary amendment filed on 11/5/2024 has been entered.
Claims 19-21 have been cancelled.
Claims 1-18 and 22-23 have been examined.
Election/Restrictions
Applicant’s election without traverse of group I in the reply filed on 3/10/2026 is acknowledged.
Claim 22 is withdrawn from further consideration pursuant to 37 CFR 1.142(b) as being drawn to a nonelected invention, there being no allowable generic or linking claim. Election was made without traverse in the reply filed on 3/10/2026.
Information Disclosure Statement
The information disclosure statement (IDS) submitted on 11/5/2024 is in compliance with the provisions of 37 CFR 1.97. Accordingly, the information disclosure statement is being considered by the examiner.
Specification
The title of the invention is not descriptive. A new title is required that is clearly indicative of the invention to which the claims are directed.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
The factual inquiries for establishing a background for determining obviousness under 35 U.S.C. 103 are summarized as follows:
1. Determining the scope and contents of the prior art.
2. Ascertaining the differences between the prior art and the claims at issue.
3. Resolving the level of ordinary skill in the pertinent art.
4. Considering objective evidence present in the application indicating obviousness or nonobviousness.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
Claim(s) 1, 4-9, 11, and 13 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over Juch et al. (US 2022/0011955) and Gorobets et al. (US 2010/0172179).
With respect to claim 1, Juch teaches of a method of operating a storage system comprising a host device and a storage device, the host device comprising a zone manager (fig. 1a-b; paragraph 45-46; controllers are analogous to the claimed host device and the persistent storages are analogous to the claimed storage device),
the method comprising: allocating, by the zone manager, a first essential write resource, a second essential write resource to a first logical zone (paragraph 64-66; where a zone is allocated and multiple pages (claimed essential write resources) are written to that zone);
allocating, by the zone manager, a third essential write resource, a fourth essential write resource to a second logical zone (paragraph 64-66; where a zone is allocated and multiple pages (claimed essential write resources) are written to that zone); and
Juch fails to explicitly teach of (1) allocating a first spare write resource, and a second spare write resource to a first logical zone; (2) allocating a third spare write resource, and a fourth spare write resource to a second logical zone; and (3) reallocating, by the zone manager, the first spare write resource and the second spare write resource to the second logical zone.
However, Gorobets teaches of allocating a first spare write resource, and a second spare write resource to a first logical zone (paragraph 154, 157-158; where each partition includes its own pool of spare blocks);
allocating a third spare write resource, and a fourth spare write resource to a second logical zone (paragraph 154, 157-158; where each partition includes its own pool of spare blocks); and
reallocating, by the zone manager, the first spare write resource and the second spare write resource to the second logical zone (paragraph 154, 157-158; where spare blocks from the MLC partition pool can be transferred to the binary partition pool and spare blocks from the binary partition pool can be transferred to the MLC partition pool).
Juch and Gorobets are analogous art because they are from the same field of endeavor, as they are directed to storage management.
It would have been obvious to one of ordinary skill in the art having the teachings of Juch and Gorobets before the time of the effective filing of the claimed invention to incorporate the spare block pools for the zones of Juch as taught in Gorobets. Their motivation would have been to maintain operation of the memory in the face of defective storage elements (Gorobets, paragraph 152-154).
With respect to claim 4, Jung teaches of wherein a first namespace comprises the first logical zone and the second logical zone (paragraph 64, 209; where the storage is made up of multiple namespaces that contain multiple zones. One namespace can contain a first and second zone),
wherein a second namespace comprises a third logical zone (paragraph 64, 209; where the storage is made up of multiple namespaces that contain multiple zones. Another namespace can contain a third zone),
wherein a third namespace comprises a fourth logical zone (paragraph 64, 209; where the storage is made up of multiple namespaces that contain multiple zones. A third namespace can contain a fourth zone), and
The combination of Jung and Gorobets teaches of wherein the method further comprises: allocating, by the zone manager, a fifth essential write resource, a sixth essential write resource, a fifth spare write resource, and a sixth spare write resource to the third logical zone; and allocating, by the zone manager, a seventh essential write resource, an eighth essential write resource, a seventh spare write resource, and an eighth spare write resource to the fourth logical zone (Juch, paragraph 64-66, 209; Gorobets, paragraph 154, 157-158; where each of the zones contain multiple pages and spare blocks to replace defective areas from Gorobets).
The reasoning for obviousness is the same as indicated with respect to claim 1.
With respect to claim 5, Jung teaches of receiving, by the zone manager, a write request for the second logical zone (paragraph 53, 66-69; where the storage controller receives a write request and the system writes to a particular zone);
performing, by the zone manager, a stripe group open operation of the second logical zone based on a stripe group of the second logical zone being not in an open state (paragraph 66-69; where the zone is empty and is opened in response to the write request);
performing, by the zone manager, a write operation on the stripe group of the second logical zone that is in the open state (paragraph 66-69; the system writes to the zone and pages of data are written into the zone);
determining, by the zone manager, whether the write operation has been performed on a last stripe in the stripe group of the second logical zone (paragraph 66-69; where the zone is in a full state); and
performing, by the zone manager, a stripe group close operation based on determining that the write operation has been performed on the last stripe (paragraph 66-69; where the zone is in a full state and is finished/closed).
With respect to claim 6, the combination of Jung and Gorobets teaches of wherein the performing the stripe group open operation comprises: determining, by the zone manager, a number of spare write resources of the stripe group of the second logical zone based on a write resource utilization rate and a local resource pool (Gorobets, paragraph 160, 162-163; where the number of spare blocks are allocated based on how prone to failure each partition is which may be based on usage and frequency patterns. Additionally, there should be at least one spare block for each partition’s pool to avoid an on the fly transfer); and
allocating, by the zone manager, physical zones to the stripe group of the second logical zone, wherein a number of the physical zones correspond to a sum of a number of essential write resources of the stripe group of the second logical zone and the number of spare write resources of the stripe group of the second logical zone (Jung, paragraph 66-70, 209; where each page is written to the opened zone until the zone is full. In the combination, this includes the spare blocks from Gorobets).
The reasoning for obviousness is the same as indicated with respect to claim 1.
With respect to claim 7, Jung teaches of wherein a first namespace comprises the first logical zone and the second logical zone (paragraph 64, 209; where the storage is made up of multiple namespaces that contain multiple zones).
Gorobets teaches of wherein the reallocating comprises performing, by the zone manager, a local overdrive operation of reallocating spare write resources in the first namespace (paragraph 154, 157-158; where spare blocks from the MLC partition pool can be transferred to the binary partition pool and spare blocks from the binary partition pool can be transferred to the MLC partition pool. In the combination with Jung, the spare blocks are transferred between the zones of Jung).
The reasoning for obviousness is the same as indicated with respect to claim 1.
With respect to claim 8, Jung teaches of performing, by the zone manager, a stripe group open operation for a first stripe group of the first logical zone (paragraph 66-70; where a zone may be opened explicitly, or implicitly by writing data to the zone);
performing, by the zone manager, a stripe group open operation for a third stripe group of the second logical zone (paragraph 66-70; where a zone may be opened explicitly, or implicitly by writing data to the zone);
performing, by the zone manager, a stripe group close operation for the first stripe group of the first logical zone (paragraph 66-70; where an explicit close operation is issued to close the zone);
performing, by the zone manager, a stripe group open operation for a second stripe group of the first logical zone (paragraph 66-70; where a zone may be opened explicitly, or implicitly by writing data to the zone);
performing, by the zone manager, a stripe group close operation for the third stripe group of the second logical zone (paragraph 66-70; where an explicit close operation is issued to close the zone);
performing, by the zone manager, a stripe group open operation for a fourth stripe group of the second logical zone (paragraph 66-70; where a zone may be opened explicitly, or implicitly by writing data to the zone); and
performing, by the zone manager, a stripe group close operation for the fourth stripe group of the second logical zone (paragraph 66-70; where an explicit close operation is issued to close the zone).
With respect to claim 9, Jung teaches of wherein the performing the stripe group open operation for the first stripe group comprises allocating, by the zone manager, a first physical zone, a second physical zone, a third physical zone, and a fourth physical zone to the first stripe group (paragraph 66-70; where multiple pages are written to the opened zone), and
wherein the performing the stripe group open operation for the third stripe group comprises allocating, by the zone manager, a fifth physical zone, a sixth physical zone, a seventh physical zone, and an eighth physical zone to the third stripe group (paragraph 66-70; where multiple pages are written to the opened zone).
The combination of Jung and Gorobets teaches of wherein the first physical zone corresponds to the first essential write resource, the second physical zone corresponds to the second essential write resource, the third physical zone corresponds to the first spare write resource, the fourth physical zone corresponds to the second spare write resource, the fifth physical zone corresponds to the third essential write resource, the sixth physical zone corresponds to the fourth essential write resource, the seventh physical zone corresponds to the third spare write resource, and the eighth physical zone corresponds to the fourth spare write resource (Jung, paragraph 66-70; Gorobets, paragraph 154, 157-158; where in the combination, the pages written to each of the opened zones include the spare blocks allocated from Gorobets).
The reasoning for obviousness is the same as indicated with respect to claim 1.
With respect to claim 11, the combination of Jung and Gorobets teaches of wherein the performing the stripe group open operation for the fourth stripe group of the second logical zone comprises: determining, by the zone manager, a number of spare write resources of the fourth stripe group based on a write resource utilization rate and a local spare pool of the second logical zone (Gorobets, paragraph 160, 162-163; where the number of spare blocks are allocated based on how prone to failure each partition is which may be based on usage and frequency patterns. Additionally, there should be at least one spare block for each partition’s pool to avoid an on the fly transfer);
based on the determined number of spare write resources of the fourth stripe group, reallocating, by the zone manager, the first spare write resource and the second spare write resource to the second logical zone (Gorobets, paragraph 154, 157-158, 160, 162-163; where spare blocks are transferred between the partitions when they are needed); and
allocating, by the zone manager, an eleventh physical zone, a twelfth physical zone, a thirteenth physical zone, a fourteenth physical zone, a fifteenth physical zone, and a sixteenth physical zone to the fourth stripe group (Jung, paragraph 66-70; where multiple pages are written to the opened zones), and
wherein the eleventh physical zone corresponds to the third essential write resource, the twelfth physical zone corresponds to the fourth essential write resource, the thirteenth physical zone corresponds to the third spare write resource, the fourteenth physical zone corresponds to the fourth spare write resource, the fifteenth physical zone corresponds to the first spare write resource, and the sixteenth physical zone corresponds to the second spare write resource (Jung, paragraph 66-70; Gorobets, paragraph 154, 157-158; where in the combination, the pages written to each of the opened zones include the spare blocks allocated from Gorobets).
The reasoning for obviousness is the same as indicated with respect to claim 1.
With respect to claim 13, Jung teaches of wherein a first namespace comprises the first logical zone and a second namespace comprises the second logical zone (paragraph 64, 209; where the storage is made up of multiple namespaces that contain multiple zones. The claimed first logical zone and second logical zones can be in different namespaces).
Gorobets teaches of wherein the reallocating comprises performing, by the zone manager, a global overdrive operation of reclaiming a spare write resource of the first namespace and reallocating the spare write resource to the second namespace (paragraph 154, 157-158; where spare blocks from the MLC partition pool can be transferred to the binary partition pool and spare blocks from the binary partition pool can be transferred to the MLC partition pool. In the combination with Jung, the spare blocks are transferred between the zone namespaces of Jung).
The reasoning for obviousness is the same as indicated with respect to claim 1.
Allowable Subject Matter
Claim 23 is allowed.
Claims 2-3, 10, 12, and 14-18 are objected to as being dependent upon a rejected base claim, but would be allowable if rewritten in independent form including all of the limitations of the base claim and any intervening claims.
The following is a statement of reasons for the indication of allowable subject matter:
McGregor et al. (US 2019/0354304) discloses multiple physical partitions of storage that are made up of rows/stripes of storage. Each row from each physical partition makes up a strip, or page of storage. However, McGregor does not specify that the first essential write resource/page corresponds to two different physical zones in two different stripe groups as claimed.
With respect to claim 23, the prior art does not teach of, “allocating, by the zone manager, a first physical zone and a second physical zone to a first stripe group of a first logical zone based on a first essential write resource and a first spare write resource…allocating, by the zone manager, a fifth physical zone to a third stripe group of the first logical zone based on the first essential write resource; and allocating, by the zone manager, a sixth physical zone, a seventh physical zone, and an eighth physical zone to a fourth stripe group of the second logical zone based on the second essential write resource, the second spare write resource, and the first spare write resource, which is reallocated from the first logical zone,” in the context of the claim.
With respect to claim 2, the prior art does not teach of, “wherein the first stripe group comprises a first physical zone corresponding to the first essential write resource, a second physical zone corresponding to the second essential write resource…and wherein the second stripe group comprises a fifth physical zone corresponding to the first essential write resource and a sixth physical zone corresponding to the second essential write resource,” in the context of the claim.
With respect to claim 10, the prior art does not teach or suggest, “based on the determined number of spare write resources of the second stripe group, reclaiming, by the zone manager, the first spare write resource and the second spare write resource from the first logical zone and updating the local spare pool to include the first spare write resource and the second spare write resource,” in the context of the claim.
With respect to claim 12, the prior art does not teach or suggest, “reclaiming, by the zone manager, the first spare write resource and the second spare write resource from the second logical zone based on a determination that the reallocated spare write resource exists in the second logical zone, wherein each of the first spare write resource and the second spare write resource corresponds to the reallocated spare write resource,” in the context of the claim
With respect to claim 14, the prior art does not teach or suggest, “determining, by the zone manager, that the first namespace is in an inactive state; and reclaiming, by the zone manager, the first spare write resource and the second spare write resource from the first namespace and adding the first spare write resource and the second spare write resource to a global pool” in the context of the claim.
With respect to claim 17, the prior art does not teach or suggest, “determining, by the zone manager, that the first namespace is in a suspended state based on there being no write request for the first namespace a predetermined period of time; performing, by the zone manager, a compaction operation on the first namespace; and reclaiming, by the zone manager, the first spare write resource and the second spare write resource from the first namespace and adding the first spare write resource and the second spare write resource to a global spare pool,” in the context of the claim.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure:
Doucette et al. (US 2023/0161500) discloses performing random write operations to zoned namespace SSDs using a zone random write area (ZRWA) buffer that writes are written to before they are written to the SSD.
Wesenberg et al. (US 2022/0188009) discloses a zoned namespace SSD where a zone active limit bounds the amount of time a host can leave a zone partially filled. The zones also include block stripe groups across the LUNs.
Kolokowsky (US 7,818,701) disclose dividing the memory into sub-zones and allocating spare blocks among the sub-zone. The sub-zone can then be resized, which triggers a reallocation of the spare blocks across the resized sub-zones.
Paley et al. (US 2010/0172180) discloses assigning spare blocks from a spare block pool to different binary (SLC) and MLC partitions and reassigning the spare blocks between the SLC and MLC partitions when there are no more spare blocks in the pool.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to MICHAEL C KROFCHECK whose telephone number is (571)272-8193. The examiner can normally be reached on Monday - Friday 8am -5pm, first Friday off.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Tim Vo can be reached on (571) 272-3642. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/Michael Krofcheck/Primary Examiner, Art Unit 2138
MICHAEL C. KROFCHECK
Primary Examiner
Art Unit 2138
Prosecution Insights