I don't know how "expensive" the STORAGE runtime option is. All I know is that when we were converting to LE COBOL we had programs that depended on that feature, so we set it.
SCEELKEX is the library to link for the clock_gettime function. SCEELKEX Like SCEELKED, contains Language Environment resident routines for non-XPLINK applications. However, case-sensitive names that can be greater than eight characters in length are contained in this library. This allows symbols such as the C/C++ printf and pthread_create functions to be resolved without requiring the names to be uppercased, truncated, or mapped to another symbol. >From >https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.5.0?topic=routines-planning-link-edit-run This "crazy side deck" files are for DLLs, so you don't need it here. ________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of Farley, Peter <0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 3:19 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> Subject: Re: Nanosecond resolution timestamps for HLL's? Hi Frank, Agreed, you do have to be able to read “header” files and “translate” C types and structures to their COBOL equivalents. I did notice you had not set the clock_id value, but I had already looked up in the C header file that CLOCK_MONOTONIC is binary zero and figured you just got lucky on the contents of WORKING-STORAGE for that field. Isn’t that runtime option expensive (in CPU time) to use? As it happens, there are a couple of sites to which I have access that do have the most recent COBOL V6.4 updates (“P231130” in the heading line), and I have recently been playing around with the new FUNCTION prototype capabilities. Neat stuff for sure. BTW, what Binder SYSLIB library is needed to get those C runtime stubs linked into a COBOL calling program? CEE.SCEELKED or others? Do we need to use one of those crazy-looking “side deck” thingamabobs? Peter From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> On Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 12:55 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Nanosecond resolution timestamps for HLL's? You have to have some knowledge of C to be able to do it. For example, I had to look at /usr/include/time.h to be able to known what types and sizes of the data fields are needed for COBOL. And the whole __errno thing, I'm not sure how I figured that out. It was some time ago. Oh, by the way, I seem to have forgotten to explicitly set clock_id. Luckily I have the runtime setting on which initiates working storage to low-values, and the clock_id value CLOCK_MONOTONIC is binary zero. CLOCK_REALTIME, fwiw, is binary 1. I got these from time.h as well. Anyway, I'd add those as 88 levels under clock_id and then set CLOCK_MONOTONIC to true before calling clock_gettime(). If you are lucky enough to have the most recent fix pack for Enterprise COBOL v6.4 you should be able to utilize function prototypes. I don't have it, but I've been aware of this feature from the COBOL 2014 standard, so I think you'd do something like this: id division. function-id. Clock-GetTime as 'clock_gettime' is prototype entry—name is longmixed entry-interface is static. data division. linkage section. 01 clock-id pic 9(9) comp-5. 01 time-spec. 05 seconds pic 9(9) comp-5. 05 nanoseconds pic 9(9) comp-5. 01 result-code pic 9(9) comp-5. procedure division using value clock-id reference time-spec returning result-code. end function Clock-GetTime. This would be coded ahead of the main program. Or better yet, placed in a copybook and "COPYed" in at the top of the main program You'd then add to the calling program: configuration section. repository. function Clock-GetTime. Then invoke the C routine like this: if Clock-GetTime(clock_id timespec) = zero [...happy path here...] else [...sad path here...] end-if You don't have to code the repository entry if you just want to add the FUNCTION keyword before Clock-GetTime, e.g. if function Clock-GetTime(...) ... You'd could also remove the "process pgmname(longmixed) nodynam", if you like, because those are handled by the enrty-name and entry-interface clauses of the function prototype definition. Have fun! ________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>> on behalf of Farley, Peter <0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu<mailto:0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>> Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 8:39 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>> Subject: Re: Nanosecond resolution timestamps for HLL's? Thank you very much Frank. I will try this out on my system. Would that such clear examples were available from IBM. Peter From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>> On Behalf Of Frank Swarbrick Sent: Tuesday, February 20, 2024 1:01 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> Subject: Re: Nanosecond resolution timestamps for HLL's? Try this. process pgmname(longmixed) nodynam id division. program-id. 'cgettime_test'. data division. working-storage section. 01 errno-ref pointer. 01 strerror-ref pointer. 01 len pic s9(9) comp-5. 01 display-x. 05 pic x occurs 0 to 1025 depending on len. 01 clock_id pic s9(9) comp-5. 01 timespec. 05 secs pic s9(9) comp-5. 05 nsecs pic s9(9) comp-5. 01 rc pic s9(9) comp-5. linkage section. 01 errno pic s9(9) comp-5. 01 h_errno pic s9(9) comp-5. 01 strerror pic x(256). procedure division. call 'clock_gettime' using value clock_id reference timespec returning rc if rc = zero display 'seconds: ' secs display 'nanoseconds:' nsecs else perform handle-error end-if goback. handle-error. call '__errno' returning errno-ref set address of errno to errno-ref call 'strerror' using value errno returning strerror-ref set address of strerror to strerror-ref move 1025 to len unstring strerror delimited by x'00' into display-x count len display quote display-x quote exit. end program 'cgettime_test'. ________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU%3cmailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>>> on behalf of Farley, Peter <0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu<mailto:0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu<mailto:0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu%3cmailto:0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>>> Sent: Monday, February 19, 2024 5:30 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU%3cmailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>> <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU%3cmailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>>> Subject: Re: Nanosecond resolution timestamps for HLL's? My initial purpose is actually part of implementing COBOL-compatible min-heap priority queue functions that return equal-priority nodes in FIFO insert order when popped. A timestamp or some other monotonically increasing integer tie-breaker provided with the input priority value is necessary to preserve FIFO order when pushing new items into the queue. As Paul (gil) pointed out, named counters might provide a similar function but would be far more performance-expensive compared to a simple STCK value. Yes, I am aware that STCK breaks at the epoch in 2038 (or is it 2042? I forget now), which isn't ALL that far away. A MetalC implementation for STCK values has been coded and works acceptably, as does of course a straight-forward assembler implementation. Extension to use STCKE instead of STCK would be trivial in either case, but of course that also doubles the space occupied by the tiebreaker value. I would much prefer an IBM-maintained solution that crosses the epoch barrier transparently. A reasonably-well-performing implementation of the C function "clock_gettime()" would probably do the trick, if it was callable from COBOL. David C. pointed out in an earlier reply that IBM XL C now has this function, if I can figure out how to invoke it from COBOL. IBM is not always very good at providing illustrative examples for inter-language cases like this. As for the actual business purpose, I'm not at liberty to discuss that. Peter From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU%3cmailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>>> On Behalf Of Binyamin Dissen Sent: Monday, February 19, 2024 4:09 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU<mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU%3cmailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU>> Subject: Re: Nanosecond resolution timestamps for HLL's? I don't understand how you will use this. What is the business purpose? On Sun, 18 Feb 2024 18:22:53 -0600 Peter Farley <0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu<mailto:0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu%3cmailto:0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu%3cmailto:0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu%3cmailto:0000031df298a9da-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>> wrote: :>I have been reviewing all the documentation I can find to provide nano-second resolution timestamps from a calling HLL batch program. STCK and STCKE instructions of course provide this (and more) resolution, but using them from any HLL besides C/C++ requires an assembler subroutine (however simple that may be for those of us who are already comfortable in assembler). In shops where any new assembler functionality is proscribed or strongly discouraged can't or would strongly prefer not to use assembler for this functionality. :>The only HLL-callable function already provided in z/OS that I can find that provides anything near that resolution is the LE Callable Services function CEEGMT, but two calls to that service from a COBOL program in a row separated by only a few calculations and a DISPLAY to SYSOUT produce identical values. This is not good enough for high-volume processing needs. Every request for a time value needs to generate a new higher value. :>Is there any other place I am not yet looking which provides nano-second resolution like STCK/STCKE and the linux function clock_gettime() besides an assembler invocation of STCK/STCKE? z/OS Unix has not yet implemented the clock_gettime() function anyway, so that is off the table. The calling HLL here will be COBOL, so the C/C++ builtin functions "__stck" and "__stcke" are not available. Would that they were, but they are not at this time. (Maybe that calls for a new "idea" to IBM . . . ?) :>HTH for any pointers or RTFM you can provide. -- This message and any attachments are intended only for the use of the addressee and may contain information that is privileged and confidential. If the reader of the message is not the intended recipient or an authorized representative of the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination of this communication is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please notify us immediately by e-mail and delete the message and any attachments from your system. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
