I see. In the case of CSVFETCH there is a 1024-byte work-area passed, so no getmain should be needed, in this case, STM should be the best option?
-----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Blaicher, Christopher Y. Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 1:50 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: CSVFETCH exit BAKR/PR does take a lot more time then STM/LM, but most times you can't just use STM/LM, you also have a GETMAIN/FREEMAIN for a register save area and other setup/restore things to do. So, once you factor in those other overheads, which is faster? I don't know as I haven't set up the tests to validly compare the different methods possible. I have seen several different ways to avoid the GETMAIN/FREEMAIN overheads. Chris Blaicher Technical Architect Software Development Syncsort Incorporated 50 Tice Boulevard, Woodcliff Lake, NJ 07677 P: 201-930-8234 | M: 512-627-3803 E: cblaic...@syncsort.com -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Leonardo Vaz Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 1:41 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: CSVFETCH exit Well, I guess using the linkage stack is cleaner because the state of the caller is preserved. Thanks for your reply, that is what I wanted to know, I was going to use STM but I remember reading somewhere before (maybe linkedin?) that they would never approve any assembler code written in the past 20 years starting with STM R14,R12,12(R13). I just would like to hear someone that would prefer BAKR and why. Thanks, Leo -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Tom Marchant Sent: Tuesday, February 16, 2016 12:53 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: CSVFETCH exit On Tue, 16 Feb 2016 16:52:03 +0000, Leonardo Vaz wrote: >I apologize if the question is silly, but I am wondering if for a >performance sensitive exit like this one I should use STM/LM instead of >BAKR/PR. I believe it's "cheaper" to do STM/LM, bur "cleaner" to do BAKR, >right? Why do you think BAKR is "cleaner"? BAKR/PR is MUCH slower than STM/LM (or STMG/LMG if you are using the high halves of any of registers 2-12). -- Tom Marchant ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ________________________________ ATTENTION: ----- The information contained in this message (including any files transmitted with this message) may contain proprietary, trade secret or other confidential and/or legally privileged information. Any pricing information contained in this message or in any files transmitted with this message is always confidential and cannot be shared with any third parties without prior written approval from Syncsort. This message is intended to be read only by the individual or entity to whom it is addressed or by their designee. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are on notice that any use, disclosure, copying or distribution of this message, in any form, is strictly prohibited. If you have received this message in error, please immediately notify the sender and/or Syncsort and destroy all copies of this message in your possession, custody or control. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
