It's called LLILF. There is also LLIHF to load the high 32 bits of the register. Also see LGFI.
Chris Blaicher Technical Architect Mainframe Development Syncsort Incorporated 2 Blue Hill Plaza #1563, Pearl River, NY 10965 P: 201-930-8234 | M: 512-627-3803 E: cblaic...@syncsort.com www.syncsort.com CONNECTING BIG IRON TO BIG DATA -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On Behalf Of Steve Smith Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2017 3:36 PM To: MVS List Server 2 <ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> Subject: Re: curious: MVHI vs XC to "zero" a halfword. Just to be clear, MVHI expands a source half-word to set a full-word. MVHHI is for half-word targets, and what MVGHI does is left as an exercise for the student. Regardless, sure seems like MVFHI would have made more sense as the first's name. Aside: if you don't already know, guess what the MY instruction does. Then look it up. And 1 more: Why is there no LFI instruction? sas On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 10:30 AM, Gary Weinhold <weinh...@dkl.com> wrote: > There`s a little more work for XC, even optimized, than for MVHI, I > think, since it has two addresses to translate. Of course that could > be optimized, too, and perhaps both are done within a cycle anyway. My > experience, based on software development, is that at some point > optimization slows down the normal path so much it`s no longer a net > benefit. > > Gary Weinhold > Senior Application Architect > > DATAKINETICS | Data Performance & Optimization > > Phone: +1.613.523.5500 x216<tel:+1.613.523.5500%20x216> > Email: weinh...@dkl.com<mailto:weinh...@dkl.com> > > [http://www.dkl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/07/dkl_logo.png]< > http://www.dkl.com/> > > Visit us online at www.DKL.com<http://www.dkl.com/> > > [http://www.dkl.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/08/banner.png]<h > ttp://www.dkl.com/mailsig> > > E-mail Notification: The information contained in this email and any > attachments is confidential and may be subject to copyright or other > intellectual property protection. If you are not the intended > recipient, you are not authorized to use or disclose this information, > and we request that you notify us by reply mail or telephone and > delete the original message from your mail system. > > > > __________ > On 2017-01-12 10:10, John McKown wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 12, 2017 at 8:58 AM, Martin Truebner <mar...@pi-sysprog.de > ><mailto:mar...@pi-sysprog.de> > > wrote: > > > > John, > > i have no clue about the hardware- > > one thing: the XC can only be used to clear it- the MVHI could be used > to create any memory-configuration possible into the half-word- so... > > The stmt ".... product's documentation said it was supported on a z9" > is correct if it continues with > > ... "---when compiled with the right archlvl" > > just saying > > > > > True. Just continuing in my "research", I noticed that the program in > question _was_ compiled on z/OS 2.2 (we are z/OS 1.12!) and _appears_ > to be written in C (just from looking at some of the stuff inside it > such as seeing "sprintf"). Interestingly, the z/OS 2.2 C compiler does > support > ARCH(7) for the z9. But ARCH(8) is the default starting with z/OS 2.2. > But the TARGET, to set the LE level, only goes "down" to z/OS 1.13 (it > was 1.12 in 2.1 because I remember when I used C on a 2.1 system which > is now 2.2). > > > > > > > Martin Trübner; everything around "PoOps of z/arch" > -- sas
