0D6 - 22: A linkage index (LX) translation exception occurred; the program interruption code is X'22'. This cannot have anything to do with the location of the target routine.
Things added to dynamic LPA are part of LPA. They are built out of (E)CSA. What they are not part of are PLPA, MLPA, FLPA which are not built out of (E)CSA. The approach of using "directed load" is frowned upon. It does not buy anything and has detrimental RAS affects, since the storage area being used as the PC target is now not known by name and thus is harder for any diagnostician to determine who owns it. There is just about no reason any more to do LOAD with ADDR to CSA for code. P.S., do not use LOAD with GLOBAL=YES if your address space could ever terminate without wait-stating the system, as the system frees that storage upon such termination. It is true that someone "could" LINK to the name since there is a name, but that is never of concern to a properly written program. The LPA routine should not be marked as AC=1. By the way, there are extremely few cases where a PC routine can *ever* be freed without introducing a system integrity problem. Do you truly know (as opposed to just hope) that no one is within the routine at the time you want to free it? 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
