Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January ----- UPDATE!!!!
There *was* more to the story The PE list in OA14708 today includes all affected PTFs and the AI information (which was only on *some* of the PTFs) has now been deleted. In addition, under 'additional symptoms' OA14708 describes the aspect of the problem which was specific to HDS hardware. Customers are now protected from inadvertently stumbling into this problem, assuming they get current holddata prior to APPLY. Thank you, IBM. Brian On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 13:51:03 -0600, Brian Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Not sure what you mean by IBM has backed off. The APAR quoted does not mention HDS, nor does it flag as PE any PTF (which means that HDS customers are still doomed to discover their new MVS maintenance fails to IPL). There must be more to the story Brian On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 09:05:13 -0600, Eatherly, John D [IT] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IBM has backed off. They created this APAR for the issue. APAR Identifier .. OA14708 (snip) PE PTF List: -- 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
Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January ----- UPDATE!!!!
IBM has backed off. They created this APAR for the issue.
APAR Identifier .. OA14708
http://www-306.ibm.com/ibmlink/link2/sis/sisPage.jsp?applJsp=documentBr
owse.jspnavItem=sis.jsplc=encc=USdocNumber=OA14708 Last
Changed 05/12/21
IEA307I I/O ERROR READING VOLUME LABEL
Symptom .. MS MSGxxxStatus ... OPEN
Severity ... 2 Date Closed .
Component .. 5695DF111 Duplicate of
Reported Release . 1G0 Fixed Release
Component Name DEVICE SUPPORT Special Notice
Current Target Date ..06/02/04 Flags
SCP ...
Platform
Status Detail: DESIGN/CODE - APAR solution is being designed
and coded.
PE PTF List:
PTF List:
Parent APAR:
Child APAR list:
ERROR DESCRIPTION:
Client received the following error during IPL for offline PPRC
volumes.
.
IEA307I 3508,23, I/O ERROR READING VOLUME LABEL,00,0200,SENSE
FOLLOWS
.
880E0004E5006A3436960F0E70E0
.
IECCINIT is at UA22489
http://www-306.ibm.com/ibmlink/link2/sis/sisPage.jsp?applJsp=documentBr
owse.jspnavItem=sis.jsplc=encc=USdocNumber=UA22489
.
DS QD,3412,SNSS
IEE459I 16.50.11 DEVSERV QDASD 135
UNIT VOLSER SCUTYPE DEVTYPE CYL SSID SCU-SERIAL DEV-SERIAL
EF-CHK
3412 -- 2105800 2105000 3339 3694 0175-27188 0175-27188
BYPASS
SENSE SUBSYSTEM STATUS
0112490100C0 4180006F F5A4
01030010
3694
1 DEVICE(S) MET THE SELECTION CRITERIA
0 DEVICE(S) FAILED EXTENDED FUNCTION CHECKING
Thanks.
John Eatherly
--
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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January ----- UPDATE!!!!
Not sure what you mean by IBM has backed off. The APAR quoted does not mention HDS, nor does it flag as PE any PTF (which means that HDS customers are still doomed to discover their new MVS maintenance fails to IPL). There must be more to the story Brian On Wed, 4 Jan 2006 09:05:13 -0600, Eatherly, John D [IT] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: IBM has backed off. They created this APAR for the issue. APAR Identifier .. OA14708 (snip) PE PTF List: -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
So, does UA22489 have the same problem with HDS as UA22552? Or does it circumvent the HDS problem?? Yes it does have the same problem. Either PTF causes the same issue. I did ask that question. Thanks. John Eatherly -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
So, does UA22489 have the same problem with HDS as UA22552? Or does it circumvent the HDS problem?? Yes it does have the same problem. Either PTF causes the same issue. I did ask that question. So IBM needs to add the AI to the superceding PTFs. Did they volunteer to do so? -- Bruce A. Black Senior Software Developer for FDR Innovation Data Processing 973-890-7300 personal: [EMAIL PROTECTED] sales info: [EMAIL PROTECTED] tech support: [EMAIL PROTECTED] web: www.innovationdp.fdr.com -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
At 15:40 -0600 on 12/30/2005, Dave Danner wrote about Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not avai: The problem is not with SMP/E. I've been told that the internal IBM systems that generate enhanced HOLDDATA are not capable of generating ACTION, DEP, etc holds. That is interesting since if you pull the enhanced HOLD data form the Web SiteI think it has ACTION, DEP, and other non-ERROR holds in the stream. -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 12/29/2005 at 02:46 PM, Brian Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: What is really needed is a ++HOLD ACTION or ++HOLD EC with text stating that Vendor-A microcode level xxx is required for compatability with PTF UZ1. However, ++HOLD ACTION / ++HOLD EC text must be included in the original PTF - they cannot be added later. Are you sure they can't be picked up by RECEIVE HOLDDATA? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
Well, well, wellI was *sure* that this could not be done. Wrong. After a closer reading of the SMP/E Commands manual, it appears that SMP/E fully supports sending ++HOLD ACTION or ++HOLD EC statements after the fact via the same mechanism (RECEIVE HOLDDATA) as ++HOLD ERROR commands. So, the answer appears to be yes, IBM could send electronic updates to ++HOLD information. Today they do not do this, but SMP/E itself apparently supports this. For those interested in looking into this further, in the SMP/E manuals, they uses the phrase HOLDSYSTEM (external) to refer to ++HOLD SYSTEM statements which are provided to a global zone via a RECEIVE HOLDDATA command and the SMPHOLD DD statement, and the phrase HOLDSYSTEM (internal) to refer to ++HOLD SYSTEM statements which are included as part of a PTF and provided to a global zone via a RECEIVE SYSMODS command and the SMPPTFIN DD statement. Brian On Fri, 30 Dec 2005 12:32:54 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 12/29/2005 at 02:46 PM, Brian Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: What is really needed is a ++HOLD ACTION or ++HOLD EC with text stating that Vendor-A microcode level xxx is required for compatability with PTF UZ1. However, ++HOLD ACTION / ++HOLD EC text must be included in the original PTF - they cannot be added later. Are you sure they can't be picked up by RECEIVE HOLDDATA? -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
At 12:46 -0600 on 12/28/2005, Eatherly, John D [IT] wrote about Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not availab: Just wanted to pass on a heads up on some APARs that require HDS microcode on DASD. And that microcode will not be available until the 2nd week in January. Was there a HOLD(ACTION) [or it might need to be HOLD(DEPENDENT?) - I forget] against these APARs (or the Fix PTFs)? If not, a BIG PACKAGING PROBLEM report should be filed with IBM since this dependency should have been mentioned so as to suppress accidental installation as occurred to you. It was reported to IBM. I was the second person to report it. There is going to be an (AI) added to the APARs as soon as I get them the HDS code level required. We are waiting to see what the microcode level is that is required for this. The APARS affected are: OA11492 first shows the problem with the HDS microcode. OA13907 has it also because it sups OA13907 We had several DASD volumes that the path would not come online after an IPL. And they just happened to be systems volumes. Thanks. John Eatherly -- 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 -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
AI information is text added to PTFs (not APARs). The AI text is visible if you go into IBMLink and call up the PTF. Or, search for a keyword which does not appear frequently in the IBMLink data base, such as HDS. The AI information notification mechanism is completely manual. You have to already know the information is there in order to find it. The AI information process reminds me a lot of Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy, in which the notice of impending doom is prominently posted in the always locked basement of City Hall, for all to read (NOT). In case I have been unclear, it is my opinion that the AI information process is completely useless. If a problem deserves publication of AI information because of the impact to customers, it absolutely deserves the automation provided by the PE process, so that IBM can re-issue the PTF with the appropriate ++HOLD text. After all, what is the goal? Making IBM PE counts go down, or to help the mainframe platform survive by helping customers to avoid rediscovering known problems? Brian On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 11:20:45 -0500, Bruce Black [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just wanted to pass on a heads up on some APARs that require HDS microcode on DASD. And that microcode will not be available until the 2nd week in January. It was reported to IBM. I was the second person to report it. There is going to be an (AI) added to the APARs as soon as I get them the HDS code level required. We are waiting to see what the microcode level is that is required for this. Neither of those APARs relates to HDS but apparently they made some change that HDS requires. What is incredible to me is that IBM is depending on you, a customer, to get the HDS microcode information. IBM and HDS have a close relationship in the disk area, and I am surprised that HDS does not have some mechanism to report this dependancy directly to IBM. This would also make sure that there are no transmission errors in getting the info from HDS to you to IBM. -- Bruce A. Black -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 12/29/2005 at 12:30 PM, Brian Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: In case I have been unclear, it is my opinion that the AI information process is completely useless. If a problem deserves publication of AI information because of the impact to customers, it absolutely deserves the automation provided by the PE process, so that IBM can re-issue the PTF with the appropriate ++HOLD text. There is no need to reissue the PTF. It is sufficient to reissue the hold data. That's what extended hold data are for. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT ISO position; see http://patriot.net/~shmuel/resume/brief.html We don't care. We don't have to care, we're Congress. (S877: The Shut up and Eat Your spam act of 2003) -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
The following scenerio may resemble the circumstances in this thread. 1) IBM writes code, tests it with IBM hardware, and issues the code as PTF UZ1 (for example). 2) Vendor-A's DASD stops working when customers install PTF UZ1. 3) IBM customers who have Vendor-A DASD call IBM to report the problem. 4) IBM updates the AI text in PTF UZ1 to reflect information that customers report to it. What is really needed is a ++HOLD ACTION or ++HOLD EC with text stating that Vendor-A microcode level xxx is required for compatability with PTF UZ1. However, ++HOLD ACTION / ++HOLD EC text must be included in the original PTF - they cannot be added later. At the time the PTF was created, it was not known that there was a dependency between the PTF and Vendor-A's DASD microcode. If IBM published a ++HOLD ERROR, then no more customers would install PTF UZ1. The ++HOLD ERROR would be resolved by a subsequent PTF which includes the correct (newly discovered) ++HOLD ACTION / ++HOLD EC text. If Vendor-A was IBM, I believe the PTF would have been marked PE. However, if Vendor-A was IBM, the problem would probably have been caught during testing before the PTF was released. Brian On Thu, 29 Dec 2005 15:04:19 -0500, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.) shmuel+ibm- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In [EMAIL PROTECTED], on 12/29/2005 at 12:30 PM, Brian Peterson [EMAIL PROTECTED] said: In case I have been unclear, it is my opinion that the AI information process is completely useless. If a problem deserves publication of AI information because of the impact to customers, it absolutely deserves the automation provided by the PE process, so that IBM can re-issue the PTF with the appropriate ++HOLD text. There is no need to reissue the PTF. It is sufficient to reissue the hold data. That's what extended hold data are for. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT -- 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
Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
The heads up of course is valuable - it's what this list is about. Just wanted to pass on a heads up on some APARs that require HDS microcode on DASD. And that microcode will not be available until the 2nd week in January. Was there a HOLD(ACTION) [or it might need to be HOLD(DEPENDENT?) - I forget] against these APARs (or the Fix PTFs)? If not, a BIG PACKAGING PROBLEM report should be filed with IBM since this dependency should have been mentioned so as to suppress accidental installation as occurred to you ... Hmmm. Despite my current dispute with IBM's asshole PoK lawyer ... As a previous employee of quite a few PCMs (Itel, National Advanced Systems, BASF/Comparex, Amdahl) it might seem odd that I have great sympathy for IBM in this case. You just would not believe the complexity of the testing that is implied here. a) How do you determine which vendors are actually involved? Don't dismiss this question - it's one of the big ones. Lawyers (even real bad ones) go white on this. Don't laugh. Fundemental b) Given the competitive nature of the business and the fact that legal entities may be involved (new interfaces, etc., regulatory authorities) how do you establish contact with potential third parties? c) Is it reasonable to expect, e.g., IBM, to maintain a skill level regarding a potentially involved third party product sufficient to enable them internally to flag a potential issue? To the degree that a user SMP/E clerk can depend on it? d) The products sold by other vendors are capable of an almost infinite combination of configurations. Which, exactly, should be tested - and at what expense, since few such vendors will offer IBM the kind of discounts they offer their users for hardware access? e) For any given PCM product, how many of the concurrently supported microcode levels should IBM test - given that they would be able to obtain back-level versions, whch most users cannot. I'm sorry - but as a life-long (almost) PCMer - I have to say this is part of the deal. If you have non-IBM (or even IBM, come to that) devices in your configuration then change control becomes YOUR responsibility. -- Phil Payne http://www.isham-research.co.uk +44 7833 654 800 -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
At 14:46 -0600 on 12/29/2005, Brian Peterson wrote about Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not avai: What is really needed is a ++HOLD ACTION or ++HOLD EC with text stating that Vendor-A microcode level xxx is required for compatability with PTF UZ1. However, ++HOLD ACTION / ++HOLD EC text must be included in the original PTF - they cannot be added later. At the time the PTF was created, it was not known that there was a dependency between the PTF and Vendor-A's DASD microcode. Adding the ++HOLD to the cumulative Extended Hold database would solve the issue of it not being in the PTF itself. In addition, the copy of the PTF that is retrievable via IBMLINK (as well as the copy that is used to create PTF cumulative service tapes) can have the ++HOLD added to the PTF so that copies sent to customers AFTER the problem is discovered will contain the info (and not need to rely on the user getting current the Extended Hold file [although this SHOULD be pulled/read-into-SMTP just prior to any APPLY/ACCEPT for safety sake]). -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
At 12:46 -0600 on 12/28/2005, Eatherly, John D [IT] wrote about Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not availab: Just wanted to pass on a heads up on some APARs that require HDS microcode on DASD. And that microcode will not be available until the 2nd week in January. Was there a HOLD(ACTION) [or it might need to be HOLD(DEPENDENT?) - I forget] against these APARs (or the Fix PTFs)? If not, a BIG PACKAGING PROBLEM report should be filed with IBM since this dependency should have been mentioned so as to suppress accidental installation as occurred to you. The APARS affected are: OA11492 first shows the problem with the HDS microcode. OA13907 has it also because it sups OA13907 We had several DASD volumes that the path would not come online after an IPL. And they just happened to be systems volumes. Thanks. John Eatherly -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
* Just as a word to the cautious - I would not IPL any system that accesses the HDS storage subsystem while an HDS microcode update is taking place. * On 12/28/05, Eatherly, John D [IT] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just wanted to pass on a heads up on some APARs that require HDS microcode on DASD. And that microcode will not be available until the 2nd week in January. The APARS affected are: OA11492 first shows the problem with the HDS microcode. OA13907 has it also because it sups OA13907 We had several DASD volumes that the path would not come online after an IPL. And they just happened to be systems volumes. Thanks. John Eatherly -- 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 -- 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
Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January.
I wouldn't IPL or Boot any system that is accessing ANY vendor's storage when microcode is being updated. :( -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Glen Gasior Sent: Thursday, 29 December 2005 4:24 AM To: IBM-MAIN@BAMA.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Warning: PTF's require HDS microcode, which is not available until the second week of January. * Just as a word to the cautious - I would not IPL any system that accesses the HDS storage subsystem while an HDS microcode update is taking place. * On 12/28/05, Eatherly, John D [IT] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just wanted to pass on a heads up on some APARs that require HDS microcode on DASD. And that microcode will not be available until the 2nd week in January. The APARS affected are: OA11492 first shows the problem with the HDS microcode. OA13907 has it also because it sups OA13907 We had several DASD volumes that the path would not come online after an IPL. And they just happened to be systems volumes. Thanks. John Eatherly -- 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 -- 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 -- 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
