Re: Re: Wait State 00050064

"Robert Schreiber [email protected] [H390-MVS]" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups gmane.comp.emulators.hercules390.mvs
Message-ID <[email protected]>
Well,  This was "set" using the Hercules X64 GUI.  I put set in quotes 
since, I *think*, that that was part of the sample CNF that came with 
it.  Not really sure where this CNF came from. I'm fairly new to 
Hercules and assumed the sample LPARNUM 01 meant 1 "LPAR", i.e. "no" LPAR.

My CNF that is saved by the GUI looks like this...

#
# Hercules Emulator Control file...
#
# Description:       R Schreiber System
# MaxShutdownSecs:   15
# LoadUnit:          0150
# RCFile:
# LogoFile:
# IgnoreParseErrors: 0
# HercGUI Version:   1.15.0.5224
#

#  System parameters
*
ARCHLVL              S/370*

MAXCPU               1
ENGINES              CP
NUMCPU               1

AUTO_SCSI_MOUNT      NO
CNSLPORT             3270
CONKPALV             (3,1,10)
CODEPAGE             default
CPUMODEL             0168
CPUSERIAL            123456
CPUVERID             00
DEVTMAX              8
DIAG8CMD             DISABLE NOECHO
ECPSVM               NO
HTTP                 PORT 80 NOAUTH
MODPATH              .
LEGACYSENSEID        DISABLE
*LPARNUM              BASIC*
LPARNAME             HERCULES
MAINSIZE             16
MANUFACTURER         HRC
MODEL                EMULATOR "" "" ""
MOUNTED_TAPE_REINIT  DISALLOW
NETDEV               192.168.1.2
OSTAILOR             OS/390
PANOPT               FULLPATH
PANRATE              50
PGMPRDOS             RESTRICTED
PLANT                ZZ
SHCMDOPT             DISABLE NODIAG8
SYSEPOCH             1900
TIMERINT             50
TRACEOPT             TRADITIONAL
TZOFFSET             -0500
XPNDSIZE             0
YROFFSET             0

Re: "Your downfall sounds like it was likely caused by your setting 
LPARNUM after having set ARCHLVL S/370. Am I right? Since 'A' comes 
before 'L' this is not entirely unexpected. "

Yes, they are in alphabetical order in the cnf. I *assume* that was done 
by the gui when it saved it? Also, why did the gui let me set LPARNUM 01 
when I had set S/370?

So, it seems that the code for ARCHLVL checks it, but the code for 
LPARNUM does not argue about value of 01 when a prior ARCHLEVEL S/370 
has been set. In this case, perhaps
LPARNUM should refuse to do what I did unless something like
LPARNUM 01 FORCES370
is specified?

I had an old, working, CNF for Hercules 3 that was much simpler...

ARCHMODE  S/370
CPUSERIAL 134001
CPUMODEL  0168
MAINSIZE  16        # 16MB Main Storage
XPNDSIZE  0
CNSLPORT  3270      # Vista3270 connect to ip:3270
NUMCPU    2
SYSEPOCH  1900      # TOD clock=0 in Jan 0, 1900
PANRATE   250       # Update panel every 250 ms

Note that that old one did not specify LPARNUM at all, so it must have 
defaulted to BASIC in that case.

Also there is a sample mvs.cnf for a 3.8 system that does not specify 
LPARNUM either. Had I used that I would have been better off.

Clearly this is a user/learning curve error, but the effect was 
"devastating" in that I had an MVS image that I could not IPL and it 
took some pretty expert knowledge to figure out what was wrong. In the 
surrounding, older comments, on this thread you can see that a lot of 
guessing was going on and it was never resolved. Now we don't know if 
the original problem was the same issue as here, but I just wanted to 
document at least one thing that I found to cause it.

It seems to me that the gui is "just" a front-end for configuration and 
running Hercules 4. Now, there's a value add from that, but it would 
seem that better error checking would be appropriate. The design 
question is whether or not Hercules should be doing it and/or the gui? I 
don't have enough experience with H or the gui to have an intelligent 
opinion yet.

I am also assuming that ARCHLVL S/370 means that H will not do anything 
that not defined in that architecture. From what I think I've read here 
is that STIDP did something that was not allowed in S/370? If so, then 
that's a bug in mind.

Now I certainly can see the usefulness of allowing non-standard 
behaviors and relaxing the "rules", but only with proper "overrides" in 
the config file.



On 9/20/2019 5:34 PM, ''Fish' (David B. Trout)' [email protected] 
[H390-MVS] wrote:
> Robert Schreiber wrote:
>
> [...]
>> Perhaps it might have been nice for Hercules to flag
>> the LPARNUM 01 since it's inconsistent with ARCHLVL
>> S/370?
> https://sdl-hercules-390.github.io/html/hercconf.html#ARCHLVL
> https://sdl-hercules-390.github.io/html/hercconf.html#LPARNUM
>
>
> https://sdl-hercules-390.github.io/html/hercrnot.html#4.1
>
>
>     "Limited automatic LPARNUM updating when setting
>      certain architecture modes"
>
>     [...]
>
>     "For the unusual case where users actually do want to run a
>      System/370 Operating System within an LPAR, you will need
>      to manually re-set your LPARNUM and CPUIDFMT values back to
>      their numeric values after setting ARCHLVL S/370. That is
>      to say, one should always follow their ARCHLVL S/370 statement
>      with a LPARNUM n|nn statement (and CPUIDFMT statement too
>      if needed) if LPAR mode for S/370 is truly desired."
>
>
> Your downfall sounds like it was likely caused by your setting LPARNUM after having set ARCHLVL S/370.  Am I right?  Since 'A' comes before 'L' this is not entirely unexpected.
>
> However, I would have thought the messages that are automatically issued when ARCHLVL is set to S/370 should have been enough of a clue:
>
>     HHC01603I archlvl s/370
>     HHC00811I Processor CP00: architecture mode S/370
>     HHC02204I ARCHLVL        set to S/370
>     HHC02204I LPARNUM        set to BASIC
>
>
> 'Tis wise to closely review one's Hercules logfile before submitting problem reports. ;-)
>
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.