On Tuesday, 03/08/2011 at 11:50 EST, Tom Huegel <tehue...@gmail.com> wrote: > I see this descrepency between TPF native and TPF as a z/VM guest. > Has anyone else seen this behavior? > Is there any explaination? I have searched high and low, but can't find an > answer. > > TPF as z/VM guest: > 3990E933 900CDA00 FEF62032 16A8000F
> TPF Native LPAR: > 3990EC33 900CD800 F0F62032 16A8000F What you are seeing is z/VM's simulation of a 3990 control unit mode when (1) A 2105 or 2107 storage controller is being used, and (2) The guest OS has not indicated that it understands 2105 or 2107 CU mode. Under those conditions, CP will simulate a 3990 in enhanced operation mode. It's the same thing the 2105/2107 does. I think the only difference is the length of path status on a PERFORM SUBSYSTEM FUNCTION: READ SUBSYSTEM DATA operation, the output of which is irrelevant to 2105/2107s anyway. Is this an academic question as a result of late-night studying of responses to CCWs? Or is there an issue? :-) Alan Altmark z/VM and Linux on System z Consultant IBM System Lab Services and Training ibm.com/systems/services/labservices office: 607.429.3323 mobile; 607.321.7556 alan_altm...@us.ibm.com IBM Endicott
