I had a reason a couple weeks ago. We were trying to programmatically verify whether we were running certain code on a zIIP or a CP. I found a bit in the PSA that it appeared was set if you're on a zIIP and not if not. It was not set for my PSA, (not surprising since I was on TSO ISPF running TASID). But wanted to look at the zIIP's PSA to verify it. But I couldn't find an easy way to locate it
Instead, the person developing a JNI routine and testing it for lazy switching effects just added it to their code and it seems to be a valid indicator. At IPL absolute 0 is the only PSA because I believe software has to implement prefixing as it implements multi-tasking. I assume absolute zero is only absolute from the lpar's (or virtual machine's) point of view. On 2019-11-12 10:00 a.m., Tom Marchant wrote: > On Tue, 12 Nov 2019 08:49:36 -0600, John McKown wrote: > >> I have never wanted to look at the PSA of any CP other than the >> one that I am running on. I'm not really sure why I would. Do you know of a >> reason to do so? I am curious. > I have no need to do so, and don't know why I might. But the post from Peter > > that you replied to was about doing that > >> I thought absolute 0 >> was used as the PSA for the IPL processor, but that, again, was an >> assumption. > That may be. I don't know. The POO would probably say. > Gary Weinhold Senior Application Architect DATAKINETICS | Data Performance & Optimization Phone:+1.613.523.5500 x216 Email: weinh...@dkl.com Visit us online at www.DKL.com E-mail Notification: The information contained in this email and any attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and delete the original message from your mail system.
