When this happens, I see that the sysprogs have a different set of ISPF options from "normal" programs and these include IPCS. In most cases however, you can still invoke IPCS via a batch job.
Robert Ngan CSC Financial Services Group IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> wrote on 2014/08/14 13:20:46: > From: "Farley, Peter x23353" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Date: 2014/08/14 13:21 > Subject: Re: SNAP macro for storage above the 2G bar? > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> > > Some organizations restrict the use of IPCS to systems programmers, > so IEATDUMP would not help me. > > I wonder, should I raise this over on IBM-MAIN as well to catch the > attention of Peter Relson or John Eells? > > Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:[email protected] > ] On Behalf Of Robert Ngan > Sent: Thursday, August 14, 2014 2:01 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: SNAP macro for storage above the 2G bar? > > Hmmm, it looks like IEATDUMP's LIST= / LISTAD= parameters only support > fullword address values. > > However, above the bar storage is included in the dump dataset. > > Robert Ngan > CSC Financial Services Group > > IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> wrote on > 2014/08/14 12:30:46: > > > From: "Farley, Peter x23353" <[email protected]> > > To: [email protected] > > Date: 2014/08/14 12:31 > > Subject: SNAP macro for storage above the 2G bar? > > Sent by: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <[email protected]> > > > > I have been reading up on the SNAP macro for some debugging efforts > > I need to accomplish, but it seems to me from RTFM that SNAP only > > supports 24- and 31-bit addresses for the STORAGE, LIST and STRHDR > operands. > > > > Assembling a SNAP macro with "SYSSTATE ARCHLVL=2,AMODE64=YES" does > > not modify the size of the address fields in the SNAP parameter > > list, which leads me to believe that 64-bit addresses are just not > supported. > > > > Am I correct in my deduction? If so, how would I go about getting > > the equivalent of a SNAP for storage above the 2G bar? > > > > Peter
