I realized that my post was missing some important details about the scenario. See "add:" below.
<snip> I tried a simple experiment: -- Mainline sets 2 ESTAEXs -- Mainline blows up <add: in AMODE 64> -- Newest ESTAEX routine gets control and updates the "AMODE 64" bit in the PSWs of SDWAEC1, SDWAEC2, SDWAPSW16 <add: to turn the bit *off*> -- That ESTAEX routine percolates -- Older ESTAEX routine gets control. It finds the AMODE 64 bits on in all of those PSWs. </snip> Regarding SpieOverride, we are considering changing that option not to require authorization. Note that you can do this yourself: You can set a "blocking" ESPIE -- ESPIE with no program interrupts identified. Then, when you're done, issue ESPIE RESET. As long as these operations don't require authorization (I don't think they do but I'm not positive), there's little reason that doing the same thing for an ESTAEX should require authorization. Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
