Gotcha. I didn't investigate DETACH in any way. It explains why no one else jumped up. My apologies. I'll step back now. *grin*
--------> signature = 8 lines follows <-------- Neil Duffee, Joe Sysprog, uOttawa, Ottawa, Ont, Canada telephone:1 613 562 5800 x4585 fax:1 613 562 5161 mailto:NDuffee of uOttawa.ca http:/ /aix1.uOttawa.ca/ ~nduffee "How *do* you plan for something like that?" Guardian Bob, Reboot "For every action, there is an equal and opposite criticism." "Systems Programming: Guilty, until proven innocent" John Norgauer 2004 "Schrodinger's backup: The condition of any backup is unknown until a restore is attempted." John McKown 2015 -----Original Message----- From: Steve Thompson [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: October 5, 2016 16:13 Subject: Re: Question About ATTACHX and ECB As I read the macro, it wants the Address TO the address. On 10/05/2016 03:13 PM, Neil Duffee wrote: > Caveat: as a daily digestor, responses are delayed. > > n00b alert: my assembler is rusty & little used these daze but doesn't "LA > R1,TCB@" load the address of TCB@ into R1. After "ST R1,TCB@", I would have > expected "L R1,TCB@" instead. > > (granted it's probably just an e-mail/transcription typo) > > -----Original Message----- > From: Steve Thompson [mailto:[email protected]] > Sent: October 4, 2016 22:47 > Subject: Re: Question About ATTACHX and ECB > > But it was pretty simple. [xnip] > > The ECB was cleared by MVCL with the Getmained area, but I did have an XC > SUB_ECB,SUB_ECB. > > Then the ATTACHX with PARAM=,ECB=SUB_ECB,and MF=(E,(1)),SF=(E,(15)) > > ST R1,TCB@ Capture the TCB ADDR > [xnip] > WAIT ECB=SUB_ECB > L R3,SUB_ECB > > LA R1,TCB@ > DETACH (1) > [xnip] ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
