Robert, This invoice has been paid for credit to your account tonight.
Mike On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 9:36 AM Peter Relson <rel...@us.ibm.com> wrote: > If an ESTAE-type recovery routine (whether ESTAE or ESTAEX or ARR or > IEAARR) is established when the IRB blows up, it will get control. > Therefore we conclude that that is not the case. > > What you have shown is not a "recovery routine for IRB" but rather a > recovery routine for the mainline that would cover an IRB if that IRB > happened to run before you terminated and if that IRB blew up so that the > mainline's recovery was the most recent recovery routine. That would not be > intrinsically different than if you LINK'd to a routine and that routine > blew up without recovery. > > You have made an assumption that just because you issued SCHEDIRB that the > IRB will run before the mainline continues. That is not a valid assumption. > It might run as soon as you release the LOCAL lock, it might not. If you > are trying to test what happens when an IRB pops on top of your RB and that > IRB blows up and your RB's recovery gets control, consider doing something > like WAIT on an ECB that is initialized to 0 and that is never posted. In > your testcase that would be right after you release the LOCAL lock. That > would make sure that your mainline did not proceed too far. > > I don't know why you want to go the route of CIRB to accomplish your test > (and if you must use SCHEDIRB, why not use the form that has the system > initialize the IRB for you and not need you to use CIRB?). Why not use > STIMER or STIMERM to wait for, say, 0.01 seconds, with an exit? The exit > routine runs as an IRB. > > You have not initialized your ESTAEX execute form from a static list form. > Whether that's relevant to your problem or not, I have no idea. > > But it is easily demonstrated that your scenario is not as you describe, > otherwise the ESTAEX routine would get control. > If, for debugging, you want to see if the recovery is in effect (not in > control) when your IRB gets control, see if the +x'A0' word in the TCB > pointed to by PSATOLD is non-0. It will be 0 if there is no > ESTAE/ESTAEX/FESTAE. In the simple case you describe you would expect to > see a non-0 address there (which locates the STAE Control Block, SCB). > > When you are providing a code example and there is any possibility that > someone will want to assemble it (perhaps even to try it), please make sure > it assembles or provide guidance on what to do to get it to assemble. > > Peter Relson > z/OS Core Technology Design > > > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
