I really think Kris's first response about the CONS option is the correct one. You don't want to use this option unless you have some specific need. WAKEUP will wake and give a rc 6 when you hit enter on the console without this option. I have done traces before and 'watched' the rc 6 occur because of something being put temporarily on the stack by CMS. In those cases WAKEUP is too efficient and catches what you don't want caught. Another quirky thing with WAKEUP is using DESBUF without CONWAIT. DROPBUF works much better with WAKEUP and isn't as finicky about whether or not CONWAIT is used. (It has been too long since I chased some of these things. Memory fades ...)
Colleen M Brown IBM z/VM and Related Products Development and Service Kris Buelens <kris.buel...@gmail.com> Sent by: The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> 09/14/2009 04:03 PM Please respond to The IBM z/VM Operating System <IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU> To IBMVM@LISTSERV.UARK.EDU cc Subject Re: Problem that is a blast from the past... As far as I know: CP FOR can only be used to execute CP commands on behalf of the target user, it does not generate console interrupts as opposed to CP SEND. 2009/9/14 Mike Walter <mike.wal...@hewitt.com> Is there any chance of some other SVM issuing a 'CP SEND' or 'CP FOR' command to the server running WAKEUP and experiencing the unexpected interrupt? Of course, in such a case of one disconnected SVM waking another up in that manner, one might expect to hear the faint strains of "Dueling Banjos" playing softly in the background! ;-) Mike Walter Hewitt Associates The opinions expressed herein are mine alone, not my employer's. -- Kris Buelens, IBM Belgium, VM customer support
