I was in problem state at the time Going back to the original question Do I run under different TMP's in problem and supervisor state
Sent from my iPhone > On Aug 27, 2014, at 5:52 PM, DASDBILL2 <[email protected]> wrote: > > I remember your concatenation issue. Just because a piece of code works > under one condition does not mean it is guaranteed to run under all other > possible conditions. > > Bill Fairchild > > ----- Original Message ----- > > From: "MichealButz" <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 9:43:28 AM > Subject: Re: Recovery routines > > Yes it is I had a 306 abend in that the concatenation wasn't authorized my > esatex intercepted it and gave the use a chance to enter a valid dsn which I > do a SVC 99. > > Later on however one of the progs goes XMEM via AR sac 256 and its in that > prog that I get a S0C4 Its all under the same TCB/RB so I should have > coverage > > I'll read up on parallel TMP in a bit > > thanks > > -----Original Message----- > From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of DASDBILL2 > Sent: Wednesday, August 27, 2014 9:48 AM > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Recovery routines > > To Rob Scott's (as usual) wise response, I will add this: Is your ESTAE(X) > routine even getting control? Put a WTO at the very beginning of your > recovery routine to tell you that your routine got control. And beware that > WTO may alter some registers that your recovery routine may need, such as R0, > R1, R14, and R15. > > Bill Fairchild > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
