Mueller, David wrote:
I'm not sure on what you say about comparing the names.
But, when you use HCD to build and download an IOCDS (IOCP) to
the machine, you have to select which CPC definition to build /
download. The different CPC definitions in the IODF would have
different I/O devices defined to them. CPC1 would only get that portion
of the I/O definition that is for CPC1, CPC2 would only get the portion
that is for CPC2, etc. Each CPC only knows about the subset of I/O
devices that are appropriate for (defined for) use on that CPC.
Presumably the OS config that you use for each LPAR is the
appropriate one for the system running in that LPAR on that CPC (with
the appropriate I/O devices for use on that CPC). I would suspect that
the systems run in the "same name" LPARS on different CPCs use different
OS config definitions.
I think, I finally understood it (thank you Roy and Mark!).
In simple words, There is no ambiguity in CPC or LPAR choice during IPL,
there is no process of choosing relevant CPC definition BECAUSE those
definitions (CPC, chpids, LPARs) are needed during POR. POR is being
done using information from IOCDS. IOCDS contains definitions for given
CPC only - again no need to choice proper CPC (I knew it before).
When CPC is activated, all the CHPID and LPAR definitions are set up;
during IPL only software portion of IODF (that about OS config) is being
read from IODF. So, again, there is no choice of CPC, MVS skips "CPC
chapter" at all and read only "OS config chapter" from IODF.
--
Radoslaw Skorupka
Lodz, Poland
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
