On Sat, Aug 23, 2025, 12:06 PM Charles Mills <charl...@mcn.org> wrote:

> +1
>
> I love these discussions. As an engineer I love trying to outguess the
> hardware's cache algorithms. I love the idea of using two immediate
> instructions to initialize a fullword rather than using a storage reference.
>
> But from a practical point of view, I could not agree more with @Colin.
> Further, unless the code in question is executed millions of times per day
> it will take years to get back the CPU time you devoted to the re-assembly.
> And if you should introduce a bug, you are never going to get that
> troubleshooting time back.
>
> Charles
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List <ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU> On
> Behalf Of Colin Paice
> Sent: Saturday, August 23, 2025 8:34 AM
> To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Execute-Type Instructions
>
> Few people should be looking at the instruction level that is being
> discussed.
> You are more likely to get performance benefits from higher up the stack.
> For example, our code used an IMS bridge exit.    Like all good programmers
> we allocated storage for our usage, did the work and then freed the
> storage.
> This showed up as a hot spot 1) because of enqueue on the storage request
> - and 2) the (small)cost of the storage requests.
> We fixed this by passing in a block of storage for the routine to use - so
> we allocated it once, and used it millions of times.
> We had a global block with a pointer to the next free trace slot.   The
> code to update this involved compare and swap. With 8 CPU's there was a
> lot of contention.  We gave each TCB their own trace area and this
> contention just disappeared.
> One customer did the same DB2 SQL query in every CICS program - just to
> check a system wide flag.    It was pointed out this request was done
> 10,000 times a second.    They changed this checking a bit in a global
> block, and deferred the need to upgrade their CPUs.
>
> So yes, look at the instruction level ... but do not forget what you are
> trying to do.   Remember there used to be discussions on *How many angels
> can dance on the head of a pin?*
>
> Colin
>

Reply via email to