Are you sure your code didn't suffer the same fate as IEFBR14? The story (Urban Legend?) I heard, was that IEFBR14 was originally just a "BR 14", but that code was APAR'd to add a "SR 15,15" before the "BR 14" to set the return code to zero. But then along came a problem with the loader, it seems that the minimum program length has to be 8 bytes, so another APAR was opened to add two NOPRs to the code. Your code without the second "BR 14" is just 6 bytes!
On Tue, 29 Sep 2009 21:34:13 -0500, William H. Blair <[email protected]> wrote: >Edward Jaffe asks: > >> Which is the best IEFACTRT? > >I am dying to know what you meant exactly by that question. > >But I'll offer my candidate (in case this is a contest): > >IEFACTRT CSECT >IEFACTRT AMODE 31 >IEFACTRT RMODE ANY >R1 EQU 1 >R14 EQU 14 >R15 EQU 15 > SR R1,R1 Write SMF termination record > SR R15,R15 JOB processing is to continue > BR R14 Return to INITiator > BR R14 (just in case the brancher's broke >* when it executes that first BR) > END > >And, yes, at one point, I had a machine where the brancher >was broke. I had to code a Bx immediately after every Bx >in case the first Bx ended up at a certain offset in a page, >else the box ignored the Bx as if it were a NOP[R] and went >on to whatever followed, unless it was an invalid opcode, >in which case it threw an ABEND S0C4 on the Bx even if the >branch address was, in fact, good. No, the CE didn't believe >me. Nobody believed me for a week or so until some special >CE diagnostic tape flown in by IBM from POK failed to run, >red lighting the box. > >The hardware guys kept telling everyone it was a software >problem, but the IBM software guys kept saying what they >saw in the dumps was impossible, so it had to be a hardware >problem. (IBM pointing fingers at itself.) Took 2 weeks to >find it. Meanwhile, everything ran fine except _my_ code, >which had the BR that elicited the error (an IEFACTRT exit, >in fact), and the odd application here and there (which the >operators just recovered and restarted on the other machine). > >I remembered the incident because a frequent complaint from >some of the less experienced application programmers working >on Assembler programs (when the PSW ended up somewhere they >didn't think it should ever have gotten to) was that "the >brancher was broke." It always gave us lots of good laughs. > >Well, for at least once in this world, it really was broke. > >-- >WB > >---------------------------------------------------------------------- >For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, >send email to [email protected] 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 [email protected] with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO Search the archives at http://bama.ua.edu/archives/ibm-main.html
