Marty,
> On more recent levels of z/VM and the hardware, you might want to be
looking at the results of the STSI (STore System Information) hardware
> instruction. It produces a level-by-level description of the "hardware"
environment, just not as nicely formatted as what proc/sysinfo gives you.
Thanks for the append (good to hear from you!).
Yes, Kris pointed me to the STSIUSE SAMPEXEC on the MAINT 193 disk. I
copied it to the MAINT 191 disk as file type EXEC and ran it on my second
level z/VM. Here is the output:
==> stsiuse
STSI(0,0,0)........................................0.0.0.
Current-config-level number: 30000000
STSI(1,1,1)........................................1.1.1.
Manufacturer: IBM
Type: 2097
Model-Capacity Identifier: 716
Sequence Code: 000000000000H15A
Plant of Manufacture: 00
Model: E26
STSI(1,2,1)........................................1.2.1.
Sequence Code: 000000000000H15A
Plant of Manufacture: 00
CPU Address: 0008
STSI(1,2,2)........................................1.2.2.
Format: 01
ACC Offset: 012C
Secondary CPU Cap.: 904
CPU Capability: 944
Total CPU Count: 34
Conf. CPU Count: 16
SB CPU Count: 0
Resv. CPU Count: 18
MP Adjustment Factors:
F03CE86C DFD4D994 D41CCF6C CB48C738 C350BF7C BBF8B8C4 B5A4B2E8
B090AE88
AC58AA78 A8C0A6F4 A578A3FC A280A118 A0009EE8 9DA89CB8 9BA09A88
998498BC
97B80000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
00000000
Alternate CPU Capability: 1350
Alt MP Adj. Factors:
F03CE86C DFD4D994 D41CCF6C CB48C738 C350BF7C BBF8B8C4 B5A4B2E8
B090AE88
AC58AA78 A8C0A6F4 A578A3FC A280A118 A0009EE8 9DA89CB8 9BA09A88
998498BC
97B80000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000 00000000
00000000
STSI(2,2,1)........................................2.2.1.
Sequence Code: 000000000000H15A
Plant of Manufacture: 00
LCPU ID: 000C
LCPU Address: 0002
STSI(2,2,1).................REXX solution..........2.2.1.
Sequence code: 000000000000H15A
Plant of Manufacture: 00
LCPU ID: 000C
LCPU Address: 0002
STSI(2,2,2)........................................2.2.2.
LPAR Number: 000C
LCPUC: 40
Total LCPU Count: 10
Conf. LCPU Count: 10
SB LCPU Count: 0
Resv. LCPU Count: 0
Logical-Partition Name: LVM1
Logical-Partition CAF: 625
Ded. LCPU Count: 0
Shr. LCPU Count: 10
STSI(3,2,2)........................................3.2.2.
DBCT: 2
Total LCPU Count: 1
Conf. LCPU Count: 1
SB LCPU Count: 0
Resv. LCPU Count: 0
Virtual-Machine Name: MAINT
Virtual-Machine CAF: 333
Control-Program Identifier: z/VM 6.1.0
Total LCPU Count: 3
Conf. LCPU Count: 3
SB LCPU Count: 0
Resv. LCPU Count: 0
Virtual-Machine Name: VM140
Virtual-Machine CAF: 300
Control-Program Identifier: z/VM 6.1.0
I see a lot of information, but I don't see the System_Identifier of the
first level z/VM (which happens to be POKDEV61). I see the LPAR name of
the z/VM that happens to be running at the first level (LVM1) and I see
the user ID that happens to be running the second level z/VM (VM140), but
I don't see any System_Identifiers.
As I think about it, this starts to makes sense as the STSI and
/proc/sysinfo information is more from a hardware point of view while
System_Identifiers are more from a software or OS point of view.
Yet we usually do identify z/VM systems by their System_Identifiers. So
it could be dangerous to associate System_Identifiers with LPARs (for
first level z/VMs) or with user IDs (for second level z/VMs) because it is
always possible to shut down one system down running on an LPAR (for first
level z/VMs) or a user ID (for second level z/VMs) and bring up a
different one. But we often leave the same system running on the same LPAR
(for first level z/VMs) or the same user ID (for second level z/VMs) for
many months, or more commonly, for years.
Therefore, I am feeling better that I do have the entire System z
hierarchy available from /proc/sysinfo. If I do want a utility that
happens to tie LPARs (for first level z/VMs) with System_Identifiers, or
user IDs (for second level z/VMs) with System_Identifiers, it is not
unreasonable to require the System_Identifier as a parameter. If for some
reason a different z/VM system is IPLed at the first or second level, it
would be reasonable to ask the sysadmin to convey this new relationship to
any utility that may rely upon it.
So, all my appends and all the replies are telling me that I have enough
information available in /proc/sysinfo/. Thanks for everyone's help, but
any replies to these assumptions are more than welcome. Thanks, all.
"Mike MacIsaac" <mike...@us.ibm.com> (845) 433-7061
