could you post what you had vs. what worked?
What didn't work: putting the SRB routine in fetch-protected key 0 storage
and invoking IEAMSCHD in key 8.
What did work: putting the SRB routine in non-fetch-protected storage.
What would also have worked: using the KEYVALUE parameter of IEAMSCHD to
Thanks for your help
I checked how the FRR param works
R2 points to 24 bytes for my use to prime as
Parameters on entry to the SRB for the FRR
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 26, 2015, at 7:39 AM, Peter Relson rel...@us.ibm.com wrote:
could you post what you had vs. what worked?
What didn't
?
It could be beneficial.
Lizette
-Original Message-
From: michelbutz michealb...@comcast.net
Sent: Jun 25, 2015 1:17 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: S0C4 At Entry to SRB routine
I did not have storage key parameter set correctly
On IEAMSCHD
Thanks
I did not have storage key parameter set correctly
On IEAMSCHD
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 25, 2015, at 8:21 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote:
In 000901d0ad3b$eb56bbb0$c2043310$@comcast.net, on 06/22/2015
at 06:36 PM, michealbutz
To help others in the future when searching for answers; could you post what
you had vs. what worked?
It could be beneficial.
Lizette
-Original Message-
From: michelbutz michealb...@comcast.net
Sent: Jun 25, 2015 1:17 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: S0C4 At Entry to SRB
, 2015 1:17 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: S0C4 At Entry to SRB routine
I did not have storage key parameter set correctly
On IEAMSCHD
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 25, 2015, at 8:21 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote:
In 000901d0ad3b
: Jun 25, 2015 1:17 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: Re: S0C4 At Entry to SRB routine
I did not have storage key parameter set correctly
On IEAMSCHD
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 25, 2015, at 8:21 AM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote
In 000901d0ad3b$eb56bbb0$c2043310$@comcast.net, on 06/22/2015
at 06:36 PM, michealbutz michealb...@comcast.net said:
I am at my wits end I have tried all sorts of things
1.Are you running from LPA or did you copy the code?
2. Show us the expanded code from the beginning to the point of
Ed Jaffe wrote:
SRB routines are *always* given control in supervisor state.
So I see it a while after I posted my question.
An SRB's execution key is controlled by the SRBPKF setting in the SRB control
block.
SRBPKF - Ah, yes, thanks. I must have missed it somewhere. Thanks again.
This is
On 6/22/2015 10:48 PM, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote:
michelbutz wrote:
I always assumed SRB's run PSW key 0 supervisor state
No disrespect, but on what reason or environment is your assumption based?
This is IMHO a dangerous assumption, unless you know something the rest of us
don't know.
On 23 June 2015 at 07:37, michelbutz michealb...@comcast.net wrote:
Still needed subpool 228 as when I tried to access data from subpool 227
s0c4 as it is fetch protected
If you have PSW key 0, how can you get an S0C4 based on fetch protection?
Can you not look at a dump and trace table to
I obviously wasn't Edward figure out what I was doing this was my first foray
into IEAMSCHD
I had previously only used schedule
Which I always started by XC the SRB block
Including SRBPKF
IEAMSCHD had a parm keyvalue which I didn't use and got a S0C4
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 23, 2015, at
Edward you are very smart by rote I always XC the SRB block
Thanks for making me aware
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 23, 2015, at 10:24 AM, Ed Jaffe edja...@phoenixsoftware.com wrote:
On 6/22/2015 10:48 PM, Elardus Engelbrecht wrote:
michelbutz wrote:
I always assumed SRB's run PSW key 0
The fetch protection was because I used subpool
227 to move data from the SRB referenced by sp 227 to my working storage
subpool 0
Once I changed to 228 the problem went away
Thanks
Sent from my iPhone
On Jun 23, 2015, at 12:24 PM, Tony Harminc t...@harminc.net wrote:
On 23 June 2015 at
.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of michealbutz
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 3:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: S0C4 At Entry to SRB routine
Hi,
I am at my wits end I have tried all sorts of things I am
I'm not sure if this is the cause of the error or not. But it appears that
the SRB is being copied to CSA, instead of being LOADed to CSA. This might
negatively impact addresses or adcons which were resolved prior to being
copied to CSA.
On Mon, Jun 22, 2015 at 3:36 PM, michealbutz
Hi,
I am at my wits end I have tried all sorts of things I am getting S0C4 at
right at the entry point to my SRB routine my SRB rtn does even take off it
goes directly to the FRR routine looking at the SDWAABCC its 940C4
*
Try Subpool 228.
For some reason I always used that subpool.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of michealbutz
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 3:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: S0C4 At Entry to SRB routine
Hi
used that subpool.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On
Behalf Of michealbutz
Sent: Monday, June 22, 2015 3:37 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU
Subject: S0C4 At Entry to SRB routine
Hi,
I am at my wits end I have tried all
michelbutz wrote:
I always assumed SRB's run PSW key 0 supervisor state
No disrespect, but on what reason or environment is your assumption based?
This is IMHO a dangerous assumption, unless you know something the rest of us
don't know.
Groete / Greetings
Elardus Engelbrecht
20 matches
Mail list logo
