Both Poster (obviously) AND Waiter are Sup key 0 The Slip trap is a good idea thanx
-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:ibm-m...@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Peter Relson Sent: Wednesday, December 23, 2009 10:14 AM To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu Subject: Re: SYSTEM COMPLETION CODE=102 REASON=0000000C >I can only relate my experinces I set >The ECB to SP 241 key 8 >And it blew up withe above comp code >When I set SP241 to a ptr to sp 0 key 8 everything worked Since it is definitely the case that SP241 key 8 will under all circumstance work as well as SP0 key 8 (ignoring the integrity concerns), and I believe that you saw what you saw, then you should conclude that your conditions are not what you think they are (or there is an APARable bug). If you are interested in finding out what is going on, then you could consider setting a SLIP trap for 0C4 (which gets converted by recovery to 102-C) and hence is not trappable by COMP=102) in nucleus module IEAVEPST, capturing an SVC Dump, and checking that the key being used and the key of the storage (and the storage address itself) are what you think they should be. Abend 102-C occurs only when the post recovery routine gets control, the mainline's having blown up accessing the ECB. If you have a dump from the 102-C the system trace will show the original program check. If it was a problem with the storage/access key, it would be PIC 4. If it was an address problem, it could be many things such as PIC 11 or PIC 10. Some obvious possibilities are -- the address of the ECB being passed is not what you think it is -- the storage is not actually key 8 -- the key that POST is using is not what you intended It might help to know -- the key and state and APF authorization of the poster -- the key and state and APF authorization of the waiter -- the exact invocation used The original post showed L R6,MYASCB LA R7,MYECB POST (R7),ASCB=(R6),LINKAGE=SYSTEM,ECBKEY=8,ERRET=CONT I don't know whether this was an exact example, or just an approximation, but if exact, it does lead to the question of whether "LA R7,MYECB" actually does reference something that is in the target (other) address space unless it was in common storage. I know it could be OK if the base for MYECB contains the address of some block in that other address space, and then the "LA" would just "add" to that address (no reference to the area pointed to by R7 would occur in the poster's space). But does it? Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
