It is highly unlikely that you would need a CMS lock. If you are in a properly established cross memory environment then PASN is going to stay put. There are multiple ways of serializing storage modifications w/o resorting to a lock.
FWIW to get a CMS lock (there's more than one) you must first hold, or obtain a Local lock. The address space whose Local lock you would need to hold depends on the location of the resources you're trying to serialize. a CML is just the local lock of either PASN or SASN when that is different than HASN - assuming you're in a valid (legally established) cross memory environment. Beware that the hardware will let you do LOTS of things that z/OS doesn't formally support. Chris Craddock Sent from my iphone On Aug 8, 2011, at 7:06 AM, Donald Likens <dlik...@infosecinc.com> wrote: > I need to update common storage from my IEFU85 SMF exit. I am currently using > a compare and swap loop to serialize on this update but I think there is a > problem with this approach and looking at using SETLOCK. My question is... > > IEFU85 is in cross memory mode. I need the CMS lock. To get the CMS lock you > must have the CML or LOCAL lock first. Since IEFU85 is in cross memory mode > must I get the CML lock or can I get the LOCAL lock? > > Part 2: If I must get the CML lock which address space should I place in R11? > > Note: I never used locking before so if I have stated anything incorrectly, > please correct me. I also have not delted with cross memory before. > > Part 3: To issue the SETLOCK command, do I have to worry about AR mode before > issuing in an SMF exit? ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
