Thanks! We'll watch for the RFC.
-Sue Shumway
On 6/26/2019 1:21 PM, Charles Mills wrote:
Yep. A typo in my typo complaint.
Charles
-----Original Message-----
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf
Of Tom Marchant
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2019 10:10 AM
To: [email protected]
Subject: Re: STORAGE OBTAIN doc inconsistency?
On Wed, 26 Jun 2019 09:36:26 -0700, Charles Mills wrote:
Is this worthy of an RFC or am I missing something?
https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.3.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r3
.ieaa400/iea3a4_STORAGE_OBTAIN.htm says
,SP=subpool number
Specifies the subpool number for the storage. (See z/OS MVS Programming:
Authorized Assembler Services Guide for a list of valid subpools.) If you
specify a register, the subpool number must be in bits 24-31 of the register
...
And
,KEY=key-number
Indicates the storage key of the storage to be obtained. The valid storage
keys are 0 - 15. If you pass the storage key in a register, it must be in
bits 56-59 in that register. ...
Isn't that bit numbering inconsistent? If the key is described as being in
bits 56-59, then the subpool should be described as being in bits 60-63,
right?
ITYM bits 56-63. There are 256 subpools.
--
Sue Shumway
z/OS Product Documentation Lead
IBM Poughkeepsie
[email protected]
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
