Re: as/400 / linux / lpar

["Leif Svalgaard" <leif@xxxxxxxx>]

From: Andy Nolen-Parkhouse <aparkhouse@attbi.com>
> IBM is so intent on pushing Linux that I think if they could have easily
> made it available on older processors, they would have.

What would IBM rather have: 1) a customer running Linux (and remember
that the issue is not Linux but fractional LPARs) on an older box, or 2)
a customer buying a new box because fractional LPARs (according to
Glen saves you a LOT of money)?
I think 2) and thus it makes sense for IBM to claim that fractional LPARs
require a new box (and to back up the claim with a suitable software
prevention scheme). But as I said before, maybe there *are* new
instructions in the newer processors and the hypervisor uses those
(maybe out of convenience rather than necessity). Just someone
tell me WHICH new instruction(s).
I don't buy the argument that "IBM says that a new processor is
needed, ergo new instructions must be present and used". I would
buy the argument "IBM says that instruction XYZ is needed for
fractional LPARs, ergo you need a new box".