IIRC, that is the same layout I noticed back in college during the 70's. > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] > On Behalf Of Richard Peurifoy > Sent: Thursday, March 28, 2013 2:45 PM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: 32760? (was: PARMDD?) > > On 3/28/2013 1:17 PM, John Gilmore wrote: > > I did not find Kevin Kelley's post entirely persuasive. This > > restriction long antedates 2 Kibyte pages, and the equation 8 x 2048 = > > 32768 is thus historically irrelevant. > > > > Does the two-fullword---not doubleword?---prefix have the structure > > |?|?|?|?|?||?|?|c|c|, in which |c|c| is the length L >= 0 in bytes of > > the PARM value? > > From looking at a dump the format is: > > pppppppp 0000llll xxxxxxx > > At entry R1 points to pppppppp > > pppppppp is the pointer to the length field of the parm (high bit on). > > llll is the length of the parm > > xxxxxxx is the value of the parm > > In my case the pppppppp field is on a double word boundary, making > the parm value also on a double word boundary. I suspect this is on > purpose, but I haven't looked for documentation to support this. > > -- > Richard > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
