Doggone computers...durn things always do what you tell them to.

On Sun, Dec 24, 2023 at 11:35 AM Tom Brennan <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Thanks Peter!  Yes, it was the surprise of an 0C4 when I expected 0C1.
> Sometimes when totally confusing things like that happen I first assume
> the computer itself is at fault, not the code I'm working on.  And guess
> what, it's always the code :)
>
> On 12/24/2023 5:58 AM, Peter Relson wrote:
> > Tom B wrote
> > <snip>
> > I was referring to my experience with a JES2 exit which setup its own
> > recovery routine.  In that code you could see it free any getmain'd
> > memory, etc. like you mentioned.  But also in that code was an error
> > that caused an 0C4.  So when the x'00' I added for temporary debugging
> > ran that user-coded recovery routine, I was surprised to get an 0C4
> > instead and had to fix the recovery routine.
> >
> > So of course JES2 had its own recovery routine in place that handled
> > the 0C4 and we got a dump and JES2 went on its merry way, perhaps after
> > disabling that exit (I can't remember).
> > </snip>
> >
> > I took a weird view of what I suspect you really meant by "0C4 instead".
> I'm now thinking
> > you just meant that you were surprised that the recovery routine did not
> complete successfully.
> > But in case you were thinking of what happened to come to my mind,
> here's some info:
> >
> > When the x'00' "instruction" was executed, it would have gotten an
> operation exception
> > and the most recently established recovery routine (see "special-case"
> below) would have gotten control for the 0C1.
> > Its SDWA would have shown that. And TCBCMPC would be x'0C1000'.
> >
> > If that recovery routine then took some exception that resulted in an
> 0C4, a newer recovery routine (established by this recovery routine) or, in
> the absence of such, the next-oldest recovery routine would have gotten
> control for the 0C4. Its SDWA would have shown that . TCBCMPC would now be
> x'0C4000'.
> >
> > Special-Case: if you have established SPIE/ESPIE for a program
> interrupt, that exit will get control even if there is a newer-established
> ESTAE-type recovery routine.
> >
> > Peter Relson
> > z/OS Core Technology Design
> >
> >
> > ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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
>


-- 
Jay Maynard

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to