Abend S202 and SVC 1 are out of synch. Do you have a timer exit doing a post? It would run under the same TCB but a different RB and if LE does not know about it, it may be ignored. If the customer (or you) can reproduce, set a SLIP to get a 'real' dump. Is there a trace table in the LE dump? It would show the SVC 2 and subsequent S202.
...chris. -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Charles Mills Sent: September-28-16 9:46 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Interpreting an S202-0000 @Jim, not much faith in LE dumps, eh? <g> I guess I will work on duplicating the problem with the LE dump disabled in favor of SYSUDUMP. Meanwhile, here is LE's take on the issue: (zero editing other than where I say "snip") Condition Information for (DSA address 000236E0) CIB Address: 00024A30 Current Condition: CEE3250C The system or user abend S202 R=00000000 was issued. Location: Program Unit: Entry: DIRECTOR Statement: Offset: +000000B6 Machine State: ILC..... 0004 Interruption Code..... 0011 PSW..... 070D1400 B1012472 <snip> ABEND code: 00202000 Reason code: 00000000 Storage dump near condition, beginning at location: 31012462 +000000 31012462 10000A6B 41000001 41106058 13110A01 07004510 C53C0000 00205810 10000A6B |...,......-.........E..........,| You can pretty well see that the offending instruction is an SVC 1. I know that LE makes some funny decisions about what is and what is not worth dumping, but I have trouble believing they "relocated" the ABEND from the POST to the WAIT. By the way, I don't know which POST and ECB was the problem. There are three ECBs in the ECBLIST, and the POST might have been for either of two of the three. Charles -----Original Message----- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Jim Mulder Sent: Wednesday, September 28, 2016 8:49 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: Interpreting an S202-0000 > 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?" Since I know of no way for WAIT to issue a 202 abend, I wouldn't believe that without seeing it in a dump myself (a dump taken by z/OS with a system trace - not some LE concoction of a dump). POST would abend the work unit which is doing the POST. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- 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
