I wanted to add that the list of facilities mentioned in one of the posts >ARCH(10) (xC12) execution-hint facility, the load-and-trap >facility, the miscellaneous-instruction-extension facility, and the >transactional-execution facility.
leads to some interesting points. The availability of an instruction on the machine (which the facility bits indicate) do not necessarily correlate to whether you may use them. When there is operating system support needed, there are often "function bits" that an application is expected to use to determine availability. We have tried to improve the IHAFACL documentation going forward to help identify those bits that correlate to facility bit(s). Transactional execution facility is one of interest. It is available only on certain z/OS releases (z/OS can run on a zEC12 on more releases than those z/OS releases that support the instruction). Further, it is not available on any z/OS release if z/OS is running under VM. Thus, for example, running on z/OS 2.2 on a zEC12 does not mean that you can use transactional execution if you might be under VM. Apparently C/C++ users are supposed to understand this and not try to run something that is ARCH(10) if running z/OS under VM if they might have coded something that led the compiler to generate instructions that are part of the TEF. 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
