It is definitely, unquestionably being reported on the WAIT, not the POST. I don't know what is in the ECB -- or even which of three ECBs is in error -- because LE in its wisdom decided the storage is not worth dumping.
An interesting question would be "if the ECB has an invalid RB address, how did POST know what task to ABEND?" Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Webster, Chris Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 5:41 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Interpreting an S202-0000 Yes you are interpreting it correctly. It is reported on the POST. During POST processing, the RB pointer is used to identify what RB/TCB issued the WAIT. It can be a storage overlay or the POSTer is not pointing at an ECB at all but some other piece of storage with the 'wait' bit turned on. It would be difficult to identify the WAITer if it wasn't an ECB being posted. Verify the ECBLIST has the correct addresses and the POSTer is posting one of them. What is the value of the ECB storage at the time of abend? ...chris. -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Charles Mills Sent: September-28-16 5:17 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Interpreting an S202-0000 A program issues a WAIT ECBLIST= for a list of three ECBs. The program receives an S202-0000 ABEND. Here is the explanation: Explanation: During processing of a POST macro, the system found an error with an event control block (ECB). 00 The system found an incorrect address for a request block (RB) in the 3 low-order bytes of the ECB specified by the problem program. The system places the address of the RB in the ECB during processing of a WAIT macro. This address must remain in the ECB until a POST macro places a post code or zeros in the ECB. Am I interpreting this correctly as indicating that the ECB was modified incorrectly *after* the WAIT ECBLIST= and *before* the completion of a POST? In other words, the WAIT ECBLIST= ran correctly through the initial processing of the function but during the processing of POST, the contents of bits 8-31 of the ECB were found not to point to a valid RB. Is there any particular reason this is reported on the WAIT rather than on the POST? Charles ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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 ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
