[Default] On 9 Sep 2020 16:16:01 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
dspiegel...@hotmail.com (David Spiegel) wrote:
>Hi Clark,
>Did you run MVS on a 4341?
>If yes, which version?
Headquarters normally did our MVT sysgens for us so this was the first
MVT sysgen I had done. After checking with Paul Dal
; of Lennie Bradshaw <032fff1be9b4-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
> Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 4:56 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
>
> I think this happened with the move to MVS/XA as XA does not recognise a
> BC mode PSW.
Hi Clark,
Did you run MVS on a 4341?
If yes, which version?
Thanks and regards,
David
On 2020-09-09 19:12, Clark Morris wrote:
[Default] On 9 Sep 2020 14:47:15 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
sme...@gmu.edu (Seymour J Metz) wrote:
In XA mode the problem is the SIO instruction. DOS.360, OS/360
[Default] On 9 Sep 2020 14:47:15 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
sme...@gmu.edu (Seymour J Metz) wrote:
>In XA mode the problem is the SIO instruction. DOS.360, OS/360, OS/VS, etc.
>don't support SSCH. Does OS/360 need BC when you sysgen for S/370? I'm
>certain;ly not aware of such a dependency
du/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Lennie Bradshaw <032fff1be9b4-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 4:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
I think this happened with the move to MVS/X
rse. Let's see what the IBM oracles tell us.
>
> Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf
> Of Mark S Waterbury
> Sent: 09 September 2020 18:35
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Architectural Level
ymoke-Bradshaw
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Mark S Waterbury
Sent: 09 September 2020 18:35
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
To add to this thread ...
I would like to know at what point during the evolution from S/370
.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Mark S Waterbury <01c3f560aac1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
Sent: Wednesday, September 9, 2020 1:35 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural
z13 will IPL a 24 bit O/S. z14 will not support a 24 bit DAT.
ZZSA and non-virtual memory utilities should still run.
On Wed, Sep 9, 2020 at 12:35 PM Mark S Waterbury
<01c3f560aac1-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> wrote:
>
> To add to this thread ...
>
> I would like to know at what point dur
To add to this thread ...
I would like to know at what point during the evolution from S/370 to S/370-XA
to S/390 to zSeries, did the architecture stop supporting IPL of any OS that
runs in "BC mode" or that starts out in BC mode, before setting up page and
segment tables and control registers
On 2020-09-05 2:11 AM, Jim Mulder wrote:
MVS had simulation for DAS in its program check handler, which
allowed SP1.2 and its successors to run on machines which did not
have DAS. DAS was first implemented via a microcode update
on the 3033. It was never implemented on 158 and 168.
Well, t
: Re: Architectural Level Sets
W dniu 03.09.2020 o 17:37, Jim Elliott pisze:
Tony,
Check my CMOS Processor Table page at
https://jlelliotton.blogspot.com/p/cmos-processor-table.html. I have the z/OS
and z/VM level sets listed there.
Comments to the table:
1. z/OS 1.1-1.5 were able to run on
0 19:40
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Architectural Level Sets
It was probably some model of the 470V and MVS/SP 1.3.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__mason.gmu.edu_-7Esmetz3&d=DwIGaQ&c=UrUhmHsiTVT5qkaA4
, Test IBM Corp.
Poughkeepsie NY
"IBM Mainframe Discussion List" wrote on
09/04/2020 06:47:52 AM:
> From: "Greg Price"
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 09/04/2020 11:45 AM
> Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
> Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion
-
De: IBM Mainframe Discussion List Em nome de R.S.
Enviada em: sexta-feira, 4 de setembro de 2020 10:10
Para: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Assunto: Re: Architectural Level Sets
W dniu 03.09.2020 o 17:37, Jim Elliott pisze:
> Tony,
>
> Check my CMOS Processor Table page at
[Default] On 4 Sep 2020 03:50:04 -0700, in bit.listserv.ibm-main
greg.pr...@optusnet.com.au (Greg Price) wrote:
>Hi - regarding several points in this thread...
>
>What I think I know:
>
>MVS 3.8 had:
>- MF/1 (component prefix IRB) writing the SMF type 7n records
>- physical swapping only
>- seque
I don't see my reply here, so I will post it again. Check out my page
https://jlelliotton.blogspot.com/p/cmos-processor-table.html
Regards, Jim
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lis
W dniu 03.09.2020 o 17:37, Jim Elliott pisze:
Tony,
Check my CMOS Processor Table page at
https://jlelliotton.blogspot.com/p/cmos-processor-table.html. I have the z/OS
and z/VM level sets listed there.
Comments to the table:
1. z/OS 1.1-1.5 were able to run on 9672 machines. z/OS 1.6 and lat
Hi - regarding several points in this thread...
What I think I know:
MVS 3.8 had:
- MF/1 (component prefix IRB) writing the SMF type 7n records
- physical swapping only
- sequential SMF data sets ("TCLOSE" anyone?)
SE1 and SE2 were free (as in zero dollars) but licensed.
MVS/SE2 had
- RMF (com
__
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on
> behalf of Jesse 1 Robinson
> Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 1:56 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
>
> It's almost Friday. Back in the day when IBM had competitors in the
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
It's almost Friday. Back in the day when IBM had competitors in the hardware
game, I worked at TRW Credit Data, ancestor of Experian. We had an Amdahl
something-or-other. I was a baby sysprog at the time, so some details are
fuzzy. A new iteration o
e.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Peter Relson
Sent: Thursday, September 3, 2020 9:16 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: Architectural Level Sets
CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL
I was thinking more along the lines of things that prev
I was thinking more along the lines of things that prevented earlier
operating systems from even IPLing on newer boxes. Such as z13 is the
last processor to have ESA/390 mode
It depends how much earlier you are thinking of. A z/OS prior to OS/390
R10 would not work on a machine that is z/Arch-on
Tony,
Check my CMOS Processor Table page at
https://jlelliotton.blogspot.com/p/cmos-processor-table.html. I have the z/OS
and z/VM level sets listed there.
Regards, Jim
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access inst
e z990 was also the first machine to mandate the use of LPARs.
Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of R.S.
Sent: 02 September 2020 15:37
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Architectural Level Sets
W dniu 02.09.202
I think the z990 was also the first machine to mandate the use of LPARs.
Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of R.S.
Sent: 02 September 2020 15:37
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: Architectural Level Sets
W dniu
W dniu 02.09.2020 o 15:08, Tony Thigpen pisze:
Peter, thanks.
But, my original question was not worded well. What I am really
looking for is:
What major feature change prevented older operating system versions
from running on the newer box.
For example: What changed on the z990 that forced t
-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
Page 7-31 says the only condition for XA is the "move-inverse facility"
has to be installed...
http://secure-web.cisco.com/1SPpJ14i6yPSxJtwCH2bDWOIflkX4XXef21JUr
Peter, thanks.
But, my original question was not worded well. What I am really looking
for is:
What major feature change prevented older operating system versions from
running on the newer box.
For example: What changed on the z990 that forced the use of the z990
compatability feature?
I a
What CPU's were involved with each level, and what was the real
underlying item changed on the CPU that forced a new level?
No one seems to have answered Tony's question.
For z/OS V2R1 and onward, the information can be found in
z/OS Planning for Installation -> Preparing the target system -
_
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf
> of Tony Thigpen
> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 10:28 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
>
> And, to make matters worse, IBM reinstated the MVCIN on later processors
> after having
Discussion List on behalf of
Jesse 1 Robinson
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 9:36 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
Instructions come and--believe it or not--instructions go. I once read some doc
on a newly introduced instruction. Don't remember the ti
Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Tony Thigpen
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 10:28 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
And, to make matters worse, IBM reinstated the MVCIN on later processors
after having dropped it for at least one machine built after the 43xx
Mike Schwab
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 10:56 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
Well, this is what confused me. OS/VS1 1.7 was released to run on the IBM 4300.
VS2 is multiple address spaces, vs VS1 is a single 16MB address space, correct?
https
ber 1, 2020 11:22 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
On 9/1/2020 6:36 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
> As for a vanishing instruction, I once wrote some code using the Move Inverse
> (MVCIN) instruction, which greatly simplified scanning data for a terminating
metz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Joe
Monk
Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 12:26 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
"WTF? DAS requires MVS/SP."
Nope. :)
It is available via USERMOD in MVS 3.8J.
Joe
On T
Monk
Sent: Wednesday, September 2, 2020 12:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
"MVS didn't use 2KiB pages,"
Yes, MVS 3.8J does use 2KB pages.
Joe
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 7:20 PM Seymour J Metz wrote:
> MVS didn't use 2KiB pages, so I
IBM's brief flirtation with extended real addressing (26-bit addressing)
in the IBM 3033, 3081, and a few models thereafter was quirky. IBM pretty
quickly dropped extended real addressing once XA debuted.
Back to Tony's original question, I think an "Architectural Level Set" is
difficult to def
Diagnosis, Design, Development, Test IBM Corp.
Poughkeepsie NY
"IBM Mainframe Discussion List" wrote on
09/02/2020 12:26:37 AM:
> From: "Joe Monk"
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 09/02/2020 01:38 AM
> Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
> Sent
support for
>16MB of real stroage.
Jim Mulder z/OS Diagnosis, Design, Development, Test IBM Corp.
Poughkeepsie NY
"IBM Mainframe Discussion List" wrote on
09/02/2020 12:27:34 AM:
> From: "Joe Monk"
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 09/02/2020 01:29 AM
; From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf
> of Mike Schwab
> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 5:25 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
>
> Well, XA+ machines only supported 4K pages / 1M segments and not 2K
> pages / 64K segment
> http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>
>
>
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf
> of Joe Monk
> Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 5:55 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
>
> 370 supported DAS (
M
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
On 9/1/2020 6:36 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
> As for a vanishing instruction, I once wrote some code using the Move Inverse
> (MVCIN) instruction, which greatly simplified scanning data for a terminating
> character. Appa
Yes. I took care of VS1 1.7D with BPE (Basic Programming Extensions) on
a 4341.
On 2020-09-01 22:56, Mike Schwab wrote:
Well, this is what confused me. OS/VS1 1.7 was released to run on the IBM 4300.
VS2 is multiple address spaces, vs VS1 is a single 16MB address space, correct?
https://nam0
On 9/1/2020 6:36 PM, Jesse 1 Robinson wrote:
As for a vanishing instruction, I once wrote some code using the Move Inverse
(MVCIN) instruction, which greatly simplified scanning data for a terminating
character. Apparently MVCIN was introduced on the 4341 (?) but not carried
forward to subsequ
Well, this is what confused me. OS/VS1 1.7 was released to run on the IBM 4300.
VS2 is multiple address spaces, vs VS1 is a single 16MB address space, correct?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_4300#Operating_systems
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 6:27 PM Phil Smith III wrote:
>
> mike.a.sch...@gmail.c
3-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 5:27 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: Architectural Level Sets
CAUTION EXTERNAL EMAIL
W
ler
SHARE MVS Program Co-Manager
323-715-0595 Mobile
626-543-6132 Office ⇐=== NEW
robin...@sce.com
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Seymour J Metz
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 5:27 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: (External):Re: Architec
du/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Tony Thigpen
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 5:20 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
I was thinking more along the lines of things that prevented earlier
operating systems from even
hmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of
Mike Schwab
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 5:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
Well, XA+ machines only support
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: Architectural Level Sets
370 supported DAS (the code is in MVS3.8J).
43XX running MVS supported DAS also. 4381 could have up to 64M of main
storage...
Joe
On Tue, Sep 1, 2020 at 4:26 PM Mike Schwab wrote:
> Well, XA+ machines only supported 4K pages / 1M segments and not
mike.a.sch...@gmail.com (Mike Schwab) wrote:
>Well, XA+ machines only supported 4K pages / 1M segments and not 2K
>pages / 64K segments. Then DAS and Access register additions. The
>43xx series only supported a single virtual address space, like
>DOS/VSE. 3090s were the only processors to su
ed more than one feature.
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
>> > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
>> >
>> >
>> > ____
>> > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf
>
ature.
> > >
> > >
> > > --
> > > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> > > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on
> behalf of Tony Thigp
t; > Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 3:25 PM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: Architectural Level Sets
> >
> > IBM has had several Architectural Level Set points where there were
> > significant changes to the CPU that prevented earlier operating system
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List on behalf of Tony
Thigpen
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 3:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Architectural Level Sets
IBM has had several Architectural Level Set points where there were
significant changes to the CPU that prevented earlier
Thigpen
Sent: Tuesday, September 1, 2020 3:25 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Architectural Level Sets
IBM has had several Architectural Level Set points where there were
significant changes to the CPU that prevented earlier operating systems
from running on them.
What CPU's were inv
IBM has had several Architectural Level Set points where there were
significant changes to the CPU that prevented earlier operating systems
from running on them.
What CPU's were involved with each level, and what was the real
underlying item changed on the CPU that forced a new level? (Let's k
58 matches
Mail list logo