Oops. I think I forgot to send this (quite a while ago).
Gil wrote:
It should be impossible for untrustworthy code to modify content of an
Authorized address space.
Yes it should. And is. And better stay that way forever. REFRPROT is not
relevant for that statement. REFRPROT is for increased
50 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option - note of thanks!
>
> Caution! This message was sent from outside your organization.
>
> To paraphrase Juvenal, "sed quis custodit ipsos custodes?" ("but who guards
> the guards themselves?")
&g
in any future posts.
Mike
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf
Of CM Poncelet
Sent: Tuesday, September 7, 2021 12:50 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option - note of thanks!
Caution! This message was
To paraphrase Juvenal, "sed quis custodit ipsos custodes?" ("but who
guards the guards themselves?")
On 06/09/2021 21:15, Mike Hochee wrote:
> Just a word of thanks to the IBM heavyweights (Jim, Peter, Sri, et. al.) to
> whom a debt of gratitude is owed for their deep-water expertise, patience,
:+1:
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Paul G wrote
Will a module loaded from an APF authorized library and marked RENT but
not REFR be placed in write protected storage?
Hasn't this been addressed many times, including within this thread?
Since there is no such thing as write-protected storage, your question is
not answerable as p
Doh...
Like count = Like count + 1
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Lennie Bradshaw
Sent: 07 September 2021 00:06
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option - note of thanks!
Like count = Link count + 1
-Original Message
Like count = Link count + 1
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Tom
Brennan
Sent: 06 September 2021 22:02
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option - note of thanks!
Like count=1
On 9/6/2021 1:15 PM, Mike Hochee wrote:
> Just a w
Like count=1
On 9/6/2021 1:15 PM, Mike Hochee wrote:
Just a word of thanks to the IBM heavyweights (Jim, Peter, Sri, et. al.) to
whom a debt of gratitude is owed for their deep-water expertise, patience, and
willingness to share knowledge when they undoubtedly have many other things to
work o
Just a word of thanks to the IBM heavyweights (Jim, Peter, Sri, et. al.) to
whom a debt of gratitude is owed for their deep-water expertise, patience, and
willingness to share knowledge when they undoubtedly have many other things to
work on.
I suspect there are many subscriber motivations for
ERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
On Sat, 4 Sep 2021 18:34:36 +1000, Andrew Rowley wrote:
>...
>I ran into this many years ago when I "cleaned up" and removed an empty
>library from the STEPLIB of one of our subsystems. That suddenly meant
>that the STEPLIB was
On Sat, 4 Sep 2021 18:34:36 +1000, Andrew Rowley wrote:
>...
>I ran into this many years ago when I "cleaned up" and removed an empty
>library from the STEPLIB of one of our subsystems. That suddenly meant
>that the STEPLIB was considered APF authorized, which resulted in S0C4
>abends when the
] on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin [000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 12:00 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: SMP/E and RENT binder option
On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 15:19:48 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>Yes, BTDT,GTTS. IMHO, installing PDS86, StarTool
behalf of
David Spiegel [dspiegel...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Monday, September 6, 2021 11:33 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
Hi R'Shmuel AMV"SH,
Don't you agree that your earlier statement has been refuted?
Please see: פרקי אבות 5:9
שׁוֹאֵל כְּעִנְיָן וּמ
On Mon, 6 Sep 2021 15:19:48 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>Yes, BTDT,GTTS. IMHO, installing PDS86, StarTool oe whatever the current name
>is, is a no brainer, and we owe Bruce a debt of gratitude.
>
What path does SMP/E, which does not supporrt the StarTool utility, provide
for upgrading a load mo
el [dspiegel...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, September 5, 2021 8:49 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
Hi R'Shmuel AMV"SH,
You said: "... That's why you have to rebuild from the object modules if
a reentrant module was incorrectly linked as REUS. ...&qu
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
David Spiegel [dspiegel...@hotmail.com]
Sent: Sunday, September 5, 2021 8:49 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
Hi R'Shmuel AMV"SH,
You said: "... That's why you have to rebuild from the object modules if
a reentrant module was i
sdata=OKM89FQ1NHIocWcpseIqFif00l3K4gvK1QpKtrha4AQ%3D&reserved=0
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of CM
Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk]
Sent: Saturday, September 4, 2021 8:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
Sure.
ssion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of CM
Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk]
Sent: Friday, September 3, 2021 10:05 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
At the risk of inviting 'flak', I suspect that there is a misconception
of what RENT and REFR modules actually
Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Andrew Rowley [and...@blackhillsoftware.com]
Sent: Saturday, September 4, 2021 4:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder optio
: Saturday, September 4, 2021 6:31 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
"A module is REFR or RENT - not if it is link-edited as REFR or RENT, but
if it never modifies its own storage."
Why do you keep lecturing us on things we already know?
Jim Mulder knows it bes
, 2021 5:51 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
AFAIK The difference between RENT and REFR is that REFR pages (or
frames) can be stolen without their having first to backed up - because
they can be REFReshed from cache or DASD without this affecting the
code's exec
...@bcs.org.uk]
Sent: Saturday, September 4, 2021 8:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
Sure. Thank you for confirming that those who know agree with what I
have said - for the benefit of those who do not know and who might
otherwise be misled into thinking that REFR
"Thanks again for 'absolving' me from having to defend and protect
systems programming from being reduced to mere systems administration,
then to level-2 and then level-1 tech support, then to help-desk support
- as per Micro$oft Windoze. I thoroughly appreciate your supporting
mainframe systems pr
Exactly.
On 05/09/2021 00:55, Andrew Rowley wrote:
> On 5/09/2021 7:51 am, CM Poncelet wrote:
>> AFAIK The difference between RENT and REFR is that REFR pages (or
>> frames) can be stolen without their having first to backed up - because
>> they can be REFReshed from cache or DASD without this aff
Sure. Thank you for confirming that those who know agree with what I
have said - for the benefit of those who do not know and who might
otherwise be misled into thinking that REFR and RENT LMODs need to be
'protected' from modifying themselves and/or can modify themselves or
whatever nonsense else.
On 5/09/2021 7:51 am, CM Poncelet wrote:
AFAIK The difference between RENT and REFR is that REFR pages (or
frames) can be stolen without their having first to backed up - because
they can be REFReshed from cache or DASD without this affecting the
code's execution - whereas RENT code pages do need
Well, the assembler cannot truly report on RENT vs REFR violations, as that
can only be determines by running the code. The assembler has no idea if a
lock is serializing a section of code.
On Sat, 4 Sep 2021 13:11:39 -0600 Paul Gilmartin
<0014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu> wrote:
:
AFAIK The difference between RENT and REFR is that REFR pages (or
frames) can be stolen without their having first to backed up - because
they can be REFReshed from cache or DASD without this affecting the
code's execution - whereas RENT code pages do need to be backed up
before they can be stolen.
(Cross-posting to IBM-MAIN and ASSEMBLER-LIST)
It's a shame that HLASM (AFAIK) conflates IBM's venerable use of
RENT and REFR.
This has led to misunderstanding in this long IBM-MAIN thread.
And recurrent false reporting by HLASM of RENT violations in
code that is RENT-compliant but merely violat
Like.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Charles Mills
Sent: 04 September 2021 18:43
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
It's really a shame that IBM-MAIN does not have a "Like" button.
Charles
-Original Me
It's really a shame that IBM-MAIN does not have a "Like" button.
Charles
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Jim Mulder
Sent: Friday, September 3, 2021 11:59 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: REN
On Fri, 3 Sep 2021 19:49:55 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
>1. No. I would expect any such incidences to be treated as a defect and
>fixed.
>
>2. No
>
>3. It was REFR and is still REFR. It was just a simple code bug,
>passing a field in the static area to BPX1OPT for a
>return parameter
When they were young I told my artist daughters that there's Art, and
then there's the Art Business. They are quite different.
On 9/3/2021 11:59 PM, Jim Mulder wrote:
Long ago, when I was a new hire at IBM, fresh out of
college with my hoity toity computer science degrees, and
without enoug
"A module is REFR or RENT - not if it is link-edited as REFR or RENT, but
if it never modifies its own storage."
Why do you keep lecturing us on things we already know?
Jim Mulder knows it best as he is the frickin author of z/OS (well he and
Peter Relson).
Please stop.
"But it is the
programme
On 4/09/2021 12:05 pm, CM Poncelet wrote:
By definition, RENT and REFR modules should never modify themselves
(excluding the peculiar case of a RENT module that ENQ's on part of its
code, modifies it, restores it to what it was, then DEQ's it - as this
would not violate the definition of RENT mod
Long ago, when I was a new hire at IBM, fresh out of
college with my hoity toity computer science degrees, and
without enough experience to have much real work to do,
I would try to argue with the MVS developers about how MVS
perverted the definitions of computer science terms, like
using "queu
pment, Test IBM Corp.
Poughkeepsie NY
"IBM Mainframe Discussion List" wrote on
09/03/2021 10:05:13 PM:
> From: "CM Poncelet"
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 09/04/2021 01:21 AM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion
At the risk of inviting 'flak', I suspect that there is a misconception
of what RENT and REFR modules actually are.
By definition, RENT and REFR modules should never modify themselves
(excluding the peculiar case of a RENT module that ENQ's on part of its
code, modifies it, restores it to what it
, Design, Development, Test IBM Corp.
Poughkeepsie NY
"IBM Mainframe Discussion List" wrote on
09/03/2021 08:34:33 AM:
> From: "Paul Gilmartin" <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 09/03/2021 07:02 PM
> Sub
On Thu, 2 Sep 2021 16:02:07 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
> I found IBM RENT modules that modified themselves
>15 years ago when I was experimenting to see what would
>happen if we tried to page-protect RENT modules. I have a list:
>
Have you a similar list of IBM REFR modules that modify themself
NY
>
> "IBM Mainframe Discussion List" IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU wrote on
>
> 09/02/2021 08:54:25 AM:
>
> > From: "Seymour J Metz" sme...@gmu.edu
> >
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> >
> > Date: 09/02/2021 03:46 PM
> >
> >
y REFRPROT.
Jim Mulder z/OS Diagnosis, Design, Development, Test IBM Corp.
Poughkeepsie NY
"IBM Mainframe Discussion List" wrote on
09/02/2021 08:54:25 AM:
> From: "Seymour J Metz"
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 09/02/2021 03:46 PM
> Subject: Re: RE
On Wed, Sep 01, 2021 at 03:18:52PM -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
> The use of REFR for storage error recovery was only
> in predecessors of MVS, and that was before my time
> at IBM. I only know about that because of Shmuel's
> posts about it.
I remember a mention in MVT/360 of the REFR attribute b
artin [000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Thursday, September 2, 2021 9:34 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
On Thu, 2 Sep 2021 12:54:25 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>Given that IBM has fetched RENT load modules and program objects from
>authorized concaten
On Thu, 2 Sep 2021 12:54:25 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>Given that IBM has fetched RENT load modules and program objects from
>authorized concatenations into SP252 for close to half a century, there is a
>case for requiring new reentrant code to also be read only. I agree about
>REFR. In both
[000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Wednesday, September 1, 2021 9:24 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 21:53:35 +0200, Bernd Oppolzer wrote:
>Many thanks for that ... I know of very large installations which
>depend heavily on being a
CM Poncelet wrote:
I was referring to LMODs containing 100's of MODs - and occupying
far more than 4K of LMOD storage.
I suspect that DIAGxx's VSM USEZOSV1R9RULES(YES | NO) might come into play
with respect to whether or not a loadmod (whether 1 csect or 100's) lands
page-aligned. The getmain
On Thu, 2 Sep 2021 02:41:09 +0100, CM Poncelet wrote:
>(a) I could not possibly 'bet', as I never gamble.
>
Neither does Peter.
>On 01/09/2021 13:45, Peter Relson wrote:
>> CM Poncelet wrote
>>
>> The LP (load point) addresses of LMODs always end with x'000' (i.e.
>> page-aligned)
>>
>>
>> w
(a) I could not possibly 'bet', as I never gamble.
(b) I would not expect e.g. IEFBR14 to be page-aligned (regardless of
its being in the LPA.)
(c) I would expect there to be 'constraints' on what-sized LMODs are
page-aligned, as in "not if less than 1K or 2K or than 4K" or whatever else.
(d) I was
On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 21:53:35 +0200, Bernd Oppolzer wrote:
>Many thanks for that ... I know of very large installations which
>depend heavily on being able to modify RENT programs, and loading them
>always into write protected storage would break their systems.
>
I recognize that the Subject: says R
: Re: RENT binder option
On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 13:25:03 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
>...
> As to the Astonishment in POLA, I would
>suggest that astonishment is relative to the
>experience of the beholder, ...
>
The oldest memories are the sharpest. I remember vividly my
astonishmen
Many thanks for that ... I know of very large installations which
depend heavily on being able to modify RENT programs, and loading them
always into write protected storage would break their systems.
In fact, I am talking of a very large customer of mine.
What they do: they load the EP point of c
gt; To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 09/01/2021 02:40 PM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion List"
>
> On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 13:25:03 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
> >...
> > As to the Astonishment in POLA, I would
> &
On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 13:25:03 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
>...
> As to the Astonishment in POLA, I would
>suggest that astonishment is relative to the
>experience of the beholder, ...
>
The oldest memories are the sharpest. I remember vividly my
astonishment as an MVS/370 novice when I discovered
ERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 09/01/2021 01:17 PM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion List"
>
> On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 01:44:44 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
>
> > As we have already discussed, program objects do get
> >rounded up to 4
-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 09/01/2021 12:43 PM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion List"
>
> On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 01:44:44 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
>
> > As we have already discussed, program objects do get
> >rounded
On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 01:44:44 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
> As we have already discussed, program objects do get
>rounded up to 4k multiples. Load modules do not.
>...
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 18:11:07 -0400, Gord Tomlin wrote:
>On 2021-08-30 17:28 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
>> Seriously, I agree wit
On Wed, 1 Sep 2021 01:44:44 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
> As we have already discussed, program objects do get
>rounded up to 4k multiples. Load modules do not.
>
So for program objects REFRPROT follows POLA.
∎
Both ends rounded?
-- gil
-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of CM
Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk]
Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 11:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
"Not all modules have or need a 4 KiB alignment." Indeed, for "
CM Poncelet wrote
The LP (load point) addresses of LMODs always end with x'000' (i.e.
page-aligned)
wanna bet?
If this is what you have seen in all the dumps you have looked at, then
you need to look at more dumps.
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Technology Design
--
IBM Corp.
Poughkeepsie NY
"IBM Mainframe Discussion List" wrote on
08/31/2021 12:58:55 PM:
> From: "Bill Hitefield"
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 08/31/2021 02:05 PM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion List
What is absurd about a page containing more than on load module?
> It happens all the time. Not all modules have or need a 4 KiB alignment.
> >
> >
> > --
> > Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
> > http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
> >
> > ____
> > From: IBM Mainfra
rom: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
> CM Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk]
> Sent: Monday, August 30, 2021 11:29 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
>
> FWIW and FYI.
>
> A 31-bit instrucion is a 4-byte ful
@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of CM
Poncelet [ponce...@bcs.org.uk]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2021 11:29 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
FWIW and FYI.
A 31-bit instrucion is a 4-byte fullword address, as e.g. say at virtual
(DAT) address x'71234568'.
The first 3 nyb
; > Behalf Of Jim Mulder
> > Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 12:56 PM
> > To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> > Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> >
> > This is not the XDC Dave Cole. Dave Cole the musician
> > was an MVS developer who worked on TSO/E (and w
=zUmMeS2c4Uw
Jim Mulder z/OS Diagnosis, Design, Development, Test IBM Corp.
Poughkeepsie NY
"IBM Mainframe Discussion List" wrote on
08/30/2021 11:29:35 PM:
> From: "CM Poncelet"
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 08/31/2021 12:26 PM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder
Is this the Dave Cole who wrote "Boney Fingers" - many years ago?
Bill Hitefield
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On
> Behalf Of Jim Mulder
> Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 12:56 PM
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: RENT
IBM Corp.
Poughkeepsie NY
"IBM Mainframe Discussion List" wrote on
08/31/2021 10:26:08 AM:
> From: "Greg Price"
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 08/31/2021 12:44 PM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion List"
&
On 8/31/2021 11:35 AM, Jim Mulder wrote:
Yes, I know the lines from that show from having
played in the orchestra for it here:
https://countyplayers.org/icpdb/shows/0502.html
I expect you chatted about diagnostic techniques with Dave during breaks
in rehearsal...
O-O
\_/
--
FWIW, REFRPROT accomplishes two things:
use of key 0 storage for reentrant modules whether from an authorized
concatenation or not (aside from the cases for which key 0 storage is not
used when it is RENT even from an authorized concatenation, such as within
TSO TEST when the requestor is not au
Hence, the OS allocates whole - not partial - 4K pages to a load module
(LMOD)
...
In other words, pages are either fully allocated/occupied to or by a
REFR LMOD's code or they are not occupied by a REFR LMOD's code at all.
This logic is flawed and the conclusions are untrue.
This relates to t
Compatibility is a concern. That is why the default will not change. It is
not only a question of "a few bytes".
There are programs that break if everything gets rounded to page
multiples.
Maybe those programs are wrong and should be fixed. But that is not our
call.
Peter Relson
z/OS Core Tec
On 31/08/2021 11:51 am, David Spiegel wrote:
Hi Andrew,
You said: "... If a module is not marked RENT, you get a nice freshly
loaded copy every time. ..."
Is that true if a module is (from a LNKLSTd PDS and the module is)
cached by VLF?
This is beyond my knowledge of the details, but I think
On 31/08/2021 10:47 am, Jim Mulder wrote:
For system integrity, programs which run in an
authorized state need to be protected from modification by
unauthorized programs. Authorized programs which can run in
an address space where unauthorized programs are also running
need to be RENT for
FWIW and FYI.
A 31-bit instrucion is a 4-byte fullword address, as e.g. say at virtual
(DAT) address x'71234568'.
The first 3 nybles (x'712') indicate the segment from which the LMOD's
storage/address has been allocated.
The next 2 nybles (x'34') are the offset to the page within the segment
th
ay, August 30, 2021 7:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
On 30/08/2021 11:49 pm, Jim Mulder wrote:
>The behavior of loading RENT modules from authorized
> libraries into subpool 252 (key 0) is to prevent them from
> being modified by unauthorized programs
Hi Andrew,
You said: "... If a module is not marked RENT, you get a nice freshly
loaded copy every time. ..."
Is that true if a module is (from a LNKLSTd PDS and the module is)
cached by VLF?
Thanks and regards,
David
On 2021-08-30 19:23, Andrew Rowley wrote:
On 30/08/2021 11:49 pm, Jim Muld
M:
> From: "Schmutzok, Mike (US - Georgia)" <02dd6b12f291-dmarc-
> requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 08/30/2021 09:32 PM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion List"
>
> The movie, 17
TSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 08/30/2021 08:51 PM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion List"
>
> > RoundUp is a suspected carcinogen.
>
> Should have referenced a bug killer rather than a weed killer, no?
> CsvSP252BlackFlag?
>
&
08:25 PM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion List"
>
> On 30/08/2021 11:49 pm, Jim Mulder wrote:
> >The behavior of loading RENT modules from authorized
> > libraries into subpool 252 (key 0) is to prevent them from
> &
On 30/08/2021 11:49 pm, Jim Mulder wrote:
The behavior of loading RENT modules from authorized
libraries into subpool 252 (key 0) is to prevent them from
being modified by unauthorized programs. That is intended
to contribute to security.
That is true, but it is a consequence of marking it RE
I don't know what Cf. or ply. mean around my name, but I was just joking
around with someone from IBM who is super helpful here and happens to
have the same name as the guy in the movie.
On 8/30/2021 1:40 PM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 13:10:50 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
On a
On 2021-08-30 17:28 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
Seriously, I agree with @Gil. Wasting a few bytes should be the default, not
leaving a few bytes unprotected.
It's a bit of a double-edged sword...
The behavior of REFRPROT is clearly stated in documentation:
https://www.ibm.com/docs/en/zos/2.4.0?t
1:41 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 13:10:50 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
>
> On a test system, you may specify the undocumented
>CsvSP252RoundUpTRAPS name in DIAGxx. For a module
>being loaded into subpool 252, that will roun
: Re: RENT binder option
⚠ EXTERNAL MESSAGE – Think Before You Click
New York responds, courteously.
On a test system, you may specify the undocumented
CsvSP252RoundUpTRAPS name in DIAGxx. For a module
being loaded into subpool 252, that will round the length up to
a 4K multiple.
Ji
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 13:10:50 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
>
> On a test system, you may specify the undocumented
>CsvSP252RoundUpTRAPS name in DIAGxx. For a module
>being loaded into subpool 252, that will round the length up to
>a 4K multiple.
>
Document it. What's IBM trying to protect via
BM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
New York responds, courteously.
On a test system, you may specify the undocumented
CsvSP252RoundUpTRAPS name in DIAGxx. For a module
being loaded into subpool 252, that will round the length up to a 4K
multiple.
Jim Mulder z/OS Diagno
*
5-star response
Lennie
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Jim Mulder
Sent: 30 August 2021 18:11
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
New York responds, courteously.
On a test system, you may specify the undocumented
.
Poughkeepsie NY
"IBM Mainframe Discussion List" wrote on
08/30/2021 12:00:52 PM:
> From: "Paul Gilmartin" <000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu>
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 08/30/2021 01:00 PM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> Sent by: &qu
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 09:49:14 -0400, Jim Mulder wrote:
> The behavior of loading RENT modules from authorized
>libraries into subpool 252 (key 0) is to prevent them from
>being modified by unauthorized programs. That is intended
>to contribute to security.
>
It would be a courtesy, think of it a
t;IBM Mainframe Discussion List" wrote on
08/30/2021 08:41:39 AM:
> From: "Andrew Rowley"
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Date: 08/30/2021 09:43 AM
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
> Sent by: "IBM Mainframe Discussion List"
>
> On 30/08/2021 11:59 am,
On 30/08/2021 11:59 am, CM Poncelet wrote:
The bottom line is that the integrity/security of a current OS cannot be
reduced to a lower integrity/security level by upgrading it to a new OS
- as e.g. upgrading OS/390 to z/OS could not result in z/OS then being
less secure than OS/390.
Hence the
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
Seymour J Metz
Sent: 30 August 2021 12:52
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
Sorry, typo; should be "I believe that with REFRPROT, a 5KiB module with
REFR will be loaded into two pages both of which are page protecte
du/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Paul Gilmartin [000433f07816-dmarc-requ...@listserv.ua.edu]
Sent: Monday, August 30, 2021 6:27 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
On Mon, 30 Aug
On Mon, 30 Aug 2021 03:33:36 +, Seymour J Metz wrote:
>I believe that with REFRPROT, a 5KiB module with RENT will be loaded into two
>pages both of which are page protected.
>
RENT does not imply REFR. Doesn't REFRPROT protect only, well, REFR?
Aren't pages far larger than 4KiB nowadays?
Joel C. Ewing [jce.ebe...@cox.net]
Sent: Sunday, August 29, 2021 7:23 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
If REFRPROT is used, the affected module is loaded into a key-0 storage
pool, so even if a partial page at the end of the module is not "page
protected", i
>
>> Lennie Dymoke-Bradshaw
>> https://rsclweb.com
>> 'Dance like no one is watching. Encrypt like everyone is.'
>>
>> -----Original Message-
>> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
>> Peter Relson
>> Sent: 28 August 202
com
> 'Dance like no one is watching. Encrypt like everyone is.'
>
> -Original Message-
> From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of
> Peter Relson
> Sent: 28 August 2021 15:02
> To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
> Subject: Re: RENT binder option
>
>
[IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of
Barry Lichtenstein [bar...@us.ibm.com]
Sent: Friday, August 27, 2021 1:11 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: RENT binder option
The binder and linkage editor manuals have attempted to describe the load-time
behaviors of modules according to the link
1 - 100 of 152 matches
Mail list logo
