Why? It seems more relevant here. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי נֵ֣צַח יִשְׂרָאֵ֔ל לֹ֥א יְשַׁקֵּ֖ר
________________________________________ From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <[email protected]> on behalf of Peter Relson <[email protected]> Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 9:24 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RES: RES: SETLOCK OBTAIN CML/CMS External Message: Use Caution Sorry, should have been sent to assembler list Peter From: Peter Relson Sent: Monday, December 9, 2024 9:22 AM To: [email protected] Subject: RES: RES: SETLOCK OBTAIN CML/CMS <snip> I'm just adding an STAE recovery rtn in case of an abend leave the word busy </snip> If you have a "word" that can be left "busy" then your design ought to be re-thought. Your use of that phrase would usually indicate that one work unit is setting a word "busy" and other work units, seeing that the word is "busy" either wait or (worse) spin until the word is "not busy". "Wait" leads to a design that is not responsive; "spin" can lead to deadlock (in particular when on an image with only a single CPU, if the "holder" might be lower priority than the "requestor"). The approach mentioned by Jonathan Scott is one that is used in many cases within z/OS. 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
