> variant, SETLOCK TEST,TYPE=HIER which answers the question It sure answered one of my question. THANKS!
> That can be considered to be true, but is irrelevant. The CMSSMF and > CMSEQDQ locks are *not* part of the intended programming > interface. You are expected *not* to obtain them. However, I don't want to obtain CMS lock while CMSSMF or CMSEQDQ is held (ABEND073). > This is correct. There are no hierarchy considerations related to obtaining > the CPU lock True with spin lock. But, not true with suspend lock per document. And always obtainable for disablement of interrupts and I/O. I was kind of waiting for IBMer to join in. Here is the entire question and my effort is to completely eliminate any chance of the lock violation. What test do I need before (if any): SETLOCK OBTAIN,TYPE=LOCAL What test do I need before (if any): SETLOCK OBTAIN,TYPE=CMS . . . What test do I need before (if any): SETLOCK RELEASE,TYPE=CMS What test do I need before (if any): SETLOCK RELEASE,TYPE=LOCAL TIA, Sail Kim Vanguard Research Institute, Inc. PLEASE JOIN US AT OUR 21st ANNUAL ENTERPRISE/RACF SECURITY TRAINING CONFERENCE AND EXPOSITION! June 10 - June 14, 2007 St. Louis, Missouri Register Today www.go2vanguard.com/expo thinkSecurity thinkVanguard This e-mail and any attachments are intended solely for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is PRIVILEGED and CONFIDENTIAL. If you are not the intended recipient of this e-mail, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this e-mail or any attachments is strictly prohibited. If you have received this e-mail in error, please delete all copies of this e-mail and any attachments and notify the sender immediately. Thank you. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
