Yes it is right direction. Yes it is sub_dp. I can dig out examples on Monday.
Also, with some planning, sub tasks can also have sub tasks On Jul 5, 2014 1:21 PM, "Tony Thigpen" <[email protected]> wrote: > Thanks, that means that I my thinking is in the right direction. > > For the pipi call, do you remember if it was the CEEPIPI(init_sub_dp) > function? > > Tony Thigpen > > -----Original Message ----- > From: Sam Siegel > Sent: 07/05/2014 01:51 PM > >> Tony. In z/os I've done the following: >> 1) root task attaches non-le asm subtaks. >> 2) each sub tasks issues pipi with parms for non- main program >> 3) each sub task saves and reuses its own le token. >> 4) each sub task call LE program via pipi and passes parms as documented. >> >> I'm not at office, so I can't give more details or name of manual >> >> Sam >> On Jul 5, 2014 9:32 AM, "Tony Thigpen" <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> I am working in z/VSE, but I know you z/OS guys/gals have been involved >>> with LE for a longer period so maybe you have been down this road before. >>> >>> In one vendor product I maintain, I have a mixture of LE/C, >>> Non-LE/Assembler and LE/enabled Assembler. >>> >>> I am in the situation where I need to attach additional subtasks to my >>> main task and those subtasks need to utilize LE services. >>> >>> I have been unable to find any documentation on running multiple LE tasks >>> in a single address space. I am not even sure if it is supported in >>> z/VSE, >>> or even in z/OS. >>> >>> I believe I will need to ATTACH the subtask and have the subtask issue >>> it's own PIPI call. >>> >>> I have used PIPI before. I have created subtasks before. I just never >>> tried to do both together. >>> >>> If anyone has tried or done anything like this on ether z/OS or z/VSE, >>> can >>> you post something about your experience and what you found worked or did >>> not work? >>> >>> Thanks, >>> >>> Tony Thigpen >>> >>> >> >>
