Leave it to one AA to counter the other. Ah, the good old days. If we were lexicographers defining terms, that one would probably be described as an archaic usage :-)
Regards, Richard Schuh > -----Original Message----- > From: The IBM z/VM Operating System > [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Alan Ackerman > Sent: Sunday, December 13, 2009 10:25 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Base Processor? > > I'm sorry, Sir Alan, but there really were "AP" (Attached > Processor) mode= ls in which the base processor could do I/O > and the attached processor could not. the IBM 3033= AP was > one such model. See > http://www-03.ibm.com/ibm/history/exhibits/3033/3033_TR03.html= > , for example. > > "Operating system support for the 3033 Attached Processor > Complex is prov= ided by IBM's Operating System/Virtual > Storage 2 Multiple Virtual Storage (OS/VS2 MVS) = or Virtual > Machine Facility/370 (VM/370)." > > Also supported by MVS/SEPP and VM/SEPP. > > No doubt this was before you were born. > > Sir Alan the Persevering > > On Thu, 10 Dec 2009 18:41:41 -0500, Alan Altmark > <[email protected]= > > wrote: > > The "base" CPU is the first CPU that is defined to your > virtual machine. > >What it really means is that you can't DETACH it, since every virtual > >machine must have at least one virtual CPU. Otherwise the term is > >meaningless. > > > >Each processor has always been able to do its own I/O. What changed > >(37= > 0 > >-> XA) was the introduction of a "channel subsystem" that enabled any > >processor to get to any device. Prior to that, each CPU had its own > >set= > > >of channels. I/O to *that* device had to be scheduled on > *that* CPU. > >N= > ow > >we're all one happy family! > > > >Alan Altmark > >z/VM Development > >IBM Endicott > >========================= > ========================== > ========== > ============== >
