Re: Modify ECB COMECBPT Intermittent response
Thank you worked now I have to try it a number if times > On Dec 9, 2018, at 4:03 PM, Charles Mills wrote: > > That is how I do it: > > EXTRACT COMADDR,FIELDS=COMM,MF=(E,EXTRACTL) > L R8,COMADDR GET ADDRESS OF THE AREA > USING COM,R8 USE R8 AS BASE ADDRESS OF COMM AREA > ICM R7,B'',COMCIBPT GET CIB ADDRESS FROM COM AREA > JZCIBDELET_NoCIB NO CIB > > QEDIT ORIGIN=COMCIBPT,BLOCK=(R7) > > CIBDELET_NoCIB EQU * > QEDIT ORIGIN=COMCIBPT,CIBCTR=1 > > Charles > > > -Original Message- > From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] > On Behalf Of Joseph Reichman > Sent: Sunday, December 9, 2018 12:20 PM > To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU > Subject: Re: Modify ECB COMECBPT Intermittent response > > I think that was it > > From what I understand After getting the CIB address via extract > I have to issue 2 QEDIT’s > > The first with a BLOCK parameter to free the start CIB > The second to a limit on the number if CIB > L RX,COMCIBPT > 1st QEDIT ORIGIN=COMCIBPT,ORIGIN=(RX) > 2nd QEDIT ORIGIN=COMCIBPT,CIBCTR=4 > Thanks > > > Joe Reichman > 170-10 73 rd ave > Fresh meadows NY 11366 > >> On Dec 7, 2018, at 9:27 AM, Joseph Reichman wrote: >> >> Let me check >> Thanks >> >> >> >>> On Dec 7, 2018, at 9:20 AM, Charles Mills wrote: >>> >>> Do you perhaps have a logic error relative to QEDIT? If you don't free the >>> CIB you may never get another MODIFY. >>> >>> Charles >>> >>> -Original Message- >>> From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] >>> On Behalf Of Joseph Reichman >>> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2018 10:48 AM >>> To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >>> Subject: Re: Modify ECB COMECBPT Intermittent response >>> >>> It doesn’t have a wait bit there is only one task waiting on it >>> The main task has 2 ECB’s in the list >>> One for the EZASMI SELECT and one for the communication ECB >>> >>> The one task that got dispatched has a number of ECB’s waiting >>> >>> Things is 1 out of 4 times the posted logic works
Re: Modify ECB COMECBPT Intermittent response
That is how I do it: EXTRACT COMADDR,FIELDS=COMM,MF=(E,EXTRACTL) L R8,COMADDR GET ADDRESS OF THE AREA USING COM,R8 USE R8 AS BASE ADDRESS OF COMM AREA ICM R7,B'',COMCIBPT GET CIB ADDRESS FROM COM AREA JZCIBDELET_NoCIB NO CIB QEDIT ORIGIN=COMCIBPT,BLOCK=(R7) CIBDELET_NoCIB EQU * QEDIT ORIGIN=COMCIBPT,CIBCTR=1 Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Joseph Reichman Sent: Sunday, December 9, 2018 12:20 PM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Modify ECB COMECBPT Intermittent response I think that was it >From what I understand After getting the CIB address via extract I have to issue 2 QEDIT’s The first with a BLOCK parameter to free the start CIB The second to a limit on the number if CIB L RX,COMCIBPT 1st QEDIT ORIGIN=COMCIBPT,ORIGIN=(RX) 2nd QEDIT ORIGIN=COMCIBPT,CIBCTR=4 Thanks Joe Reichman 170-10 73 rd ave Fresh meadows NY 11366 > On Dec 7, 2018, at 9:27 AM, Joseph Reichman wrote: > > Let me check > Thanks > > > >> On Dec 7, 2018, at 9:20 AM, Charles Mills wrote: >> >> Do you perhaps have a logic error relative to QEDIT? If you don't free the >> CIB you may never get another MODIFY. >> >> Charles >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] >> On Behalf Of Joseph Reichman >> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2018 10:48 AM >> To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Modify ECB COMECBPT Intermittent response >> >> It doesn’t have a wait bit there is only one task waiting on it >> The main task has 2 ECB’s in the list >> One for the EZASMI SELECT and one for the communication ECB >> >> The one task that got dispatched has a number of ECB’s waiting >> >> Things is 1 out of 4 times the posted logic works
Re: Modify ECB COMECBPT Intermittent response
I think that was it From what I understand After getting the CIB address via extract I have to issue 2 QEDIT’s The first with a BLOCK parameter to free the start CIB The second to a limit on the number if CIB L RX,COMCIBPT 1st QEDIT ORIGIN=COMCIBPT,ORIGIN=(RX) 2nd QEDIT ORIGIN=COMCIBPT,CIBCTR=4 Thanks Joe Reichman 170-10 73 rd ave Fresh meadows NY 11366 > On Dec 7, 2018, at 9:27 AM, Joseph Reichman wrote: > > Let me check > Thanks > > > >> On Dec 7, 2018, at 9:20 AM, Charles Mills wrote: >> >> Do you perhaps have a logic error relative to QEDIT? If you don't free the >> CIB you may never get another MODIFY. >> >> Charles >> >> -Original Message- >> From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] >> On Behalf Of Joseph Reichman >> Sent: Thursday, December 6, 2018 10:48 AM >> To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU >> Subject: Re: Modify ECB COMECBPT Intermittent response >> >> It doesn’t have a wait bit there is only one task waiting on it >> The main task has 2 ECB’s in the list >> One for the EZASMI SELECT and one for the communication ECB >> >> The one task that got dispatched has a number of ECB’s waiting >> >> Things is 1 out of 4 times the posted logic works
Re: Getting the Last Condition Code
Speaking as someone who has worked on OS and I/O subsystem development for more than 45 years, I wholeheartedly agree with the comments and observations posted by Brent Longborough. I've always found the style of invoking some function and depending upon the Condition Code upon return to be worse than just smelly. If, during the course of a code review, the more seasoned folks on my development team encountered that style, the code was rejected and it was required to be reworked. I'm also not a big fan of the "vectored returns" (e.g., B 0(,R14) for one condition, B 4(,R14) for another, etc.). Among other things, this introduces an undesirable dependency upon the size of the instruction(s) following the linkage instruction in the caller's code. Return Codes and Reason Codes (typically in R15 and R0, respectively) work quite nicely and are much more maintainable. Of course, nothing is perfect and developers need to be very much aware of what they are doing and what kind of a mess (or hopefully, lack thereof) they are leaving for the next individual who has to work on the code. Bob
