> > I have a batch program (A) that is re-entrant. However, statically linked > > to it is a program (B) that is not re-entrant. > > I thought that in this situation, the entire load module would be marked > non-reentrant by the linkage editor and treated as such during > execution; e.g., a new copy would be loaded each time the module is called. > > Is that NOT the case? >
In my experience that is the case. The problem arose because program (B) was marked re-entrant when it was linked but it was not written to be re-entrant. The Binder took my word for it. When program (A) was linked, the call to program (B) was resolved using the previously linked copy which was marked RENT, so the Binder saw no conflict. > Besides, a S0C4 will only occur if you store into storage that is not > allocated [to you] or that is allocated with the "wrong" storage protect > key. That should not be the case for your own load module. > My understanding was that re-entrant modules were loaded under a storage protect key that prevents self-modification. I have since been set straight on the conditions when this does or does not happen. > I didn't recall that APF authorized code got loaded into protected > storage but that is certainly possible or perhaps new... > > -- > Leland Sheppard > Placerville, California, USA > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO > Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
