I am a bit behind on this issue so maybe you have tried some of the below.
I am puzzled by this unless the ARCH parm is not taken by the compiler for some
reason. Do you have the same problem using the DEFAULT ARCH value?
Generate the assembler listing and then see if the S0C1 or S0C4 actually
happens in the COBOL code. Also check the ARCH value in the listing. Look for
Vector instructions, in the assembler listing for starters. I did this for the
C modules compiled under z/OS 2.3 and ARCH(12) and the new Vector instructions
were in the listing. They were not there using earlier versions of the
compiler. I generate C code all of the time using the ARCH and TUNEs value for
the client's machine. The code is compiled on a z14. Client's with z12s and
z13s report no issues. This is all using LE.
One item of interest, maybe, is that the C code compiled with ARCH(12) on z/OS
2.3 runs without issue on z/OS 2.2 and 2.2's LE on a z14.
Can you run without the 3rd party software and see if your code runs?
John T. Abell
Tel: 800-295-7608 Option 4
President
International: 1-416-593-5578 Option 4
E-mail: john.ab...@intnlsoftwareproducts.com
Fax: 800-295-7609
International: 1-416-593-5579
International Software Products
www.ispinfo.com
This email may contain confidential and privileged material for the sole use of
the intended recipient(s). Any review, use, retention, distribution or
disclosure by others is strictly prohibited. If you are not the intended
recipient (or authorized to receive on behalf of the named recipient), please
contact the sender by reply email and delete all copies of this message.
Also,email is susceptible to data corruption, interception,
tampering, unauthorized amendment and viruses. We only send and receive emails
on the basis that we are not liable for any such corruption, interception,
tampering, amendment or viruses or any consequence thereof.
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of Mike Schwab
Sent: Friday, May 03, 2019 8:41 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: COBOL 6.2 and ARCH(12)
Is the abend in the user compiled instructions? Then check the compiler
processor settings.
Is the abend in the vendor compiled libraries or included subroutines?
Then check the vendor's subroutine / runtime libraries.
On Fri, May 3, 2019 at 6:52 PM Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:
>
> I think I disagree.
>
> You compile the program for ARCH(8). IBM guarantees that it will run on a z10
> (do I have that right?). They do NOT guarantee that the program plus LE will
> behave on a z114 exactly as though it were running on a z10.
>
> No matter what ARCH the program were compiled for, I would expect that LE
> running on a z114 might well exploit the actual hardware. I would be kind of
> unhappy if it did NOT.
>
> The vendor product either supports z114's or it does not. If they do not
> support z114 instructions, they should admit that they do not.
>
> > If LE really is doing this, why even have an ABO product
>
> To update ("optimize") the *compiled* object code. The OS-resident
> support/library modules (LE) are a different matter. They are already (I am
> guessing) at a current level.
>
> What is the z/OS release? I would expect LE to be built for the lowest level
> hardware that that release supported, but LE might be clever enough to
> dual-path, and I think that would be a good thing.
>
> Charles
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU]
> On Behalf Of Mark Zelden
> Sent: Friday, May 3, 2019 3:35 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: COBOL 6.2 and ARCH(12)
>
> On Fri, 3 May 2019 15:57:34 -0400, Brian Chapman <bchapma...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> >We have a vendor debugging product that is constantly causing 0C1 and
> >0C4 abends since we have upgraded to COBOL 6.2. It also caused these
> >abends when we were at COBOL 4,2, but the abend rate has grown
> >considerably after the upgrade.
> >
> >The vendor has produced countless patches, but so far they have not
> >resolved the issues. We were notified today that they believe they
> >understand the issue. They are stating that even though our COBOL
> >compiler is set with ARCH(8) (to support our DRE machine), LE
> >run-time is recognizing that the program is COBOL 6.2, running on a
> >z14, and automatically switch the ARCH level to ARCH(12). They
> >believe the run-time execution is exploiting the new Vector Packed
> >Decimal Facility and producing erratic behavior.
> >
> >I searched through several presentations and IBM manuals for COBOL
> >6.2, and everything I have found states that a recompile with
> >ARCH(12) is required to take advantage of the new facility. Is the vendor
> >correct?
> >
> >
>
> I've never heard of that and I wouldn't expect IBM to ever do something like
> that,
> but heck, what do I know. ;-) LE shouldn't be trying to outsmart the
> person that
> compiled the code (IMHO).
>
> 1) Have you verified the options in a compile listing are as you expected?
>
> 2) Are you running ABO and could that be involved? Although I know
> nothing about configuration ABO (I have never "seen" or used it), even
> if you were I woudn't think you would have it configured to use z14
> instructions.
>
> If LE really is doing this, why even have an ABO product. I certainly would
> open
> an SR with IBM LE support about it.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send
> email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
--
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
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
