Re: Thank you to LRS and to BIS
Amen to that. And to complement - when plans do not materialize, they do not stop the madness, they increase spendings to make it ...more mad. And more. And even more. And they start to looking for those to blame. Like mainframe folks who take care about the system. (can't say more) -- Radoslaw Skorupka (looking for new job) Lodz, Poland W dniu 01.02.2021 o 23:02, Ramsey Hallman pisze: Dave, I regret to hear of another mainframe shutting down. It's a shame many companies do not realize exactly what they are doing until it is too late. I don't know about WSU, but the companies I've been involved with who migrated off of IBM mainframes were surprised to find how much it cost to "replace" the horsepower of a mainframe. On a spreadsheet, mainframes look ugly in cost, both iron and software. In actuality, the power produced by that iron and software FAR outperforms any other platform. My most recent shop (that migrated) thought they could replace a z10 with a quad-core Intel system, or so new management said. 100+ quad-core systems later and 100+ software licenses and they still could not meet the published response times the company guaranteed to users. Of course, they were too far down the road to back out at that point, but the migration to a "cheaper platform" ended up costing them about $1.2M/yr more than the mainframe and software licenses. I was quite pleased to see the manager who thought this was such a great idea be fired after completion of the project when the true costs, hardware, software, and response began coming in. JR On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 2:11 PM Gibney, Dave wrote: I wish this wasn't true, but we continue to move towards shutting down or z/OS systems. Last night I shutdown VPS and DRS from Levi, Ray and Shoup. I wish to thank LRS for the one month license extension they granted us at no charge. Our employees did get W2 forms :) I also shut down our session manager, Netpass from BIS. Bis also granted us a one month, no charge extension. I was very please by the support we received from both companies over the last more than 30 years. Dave Gibney Information Technology Services Washington State University -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Rexx stem variable question
Thanks all. I am getting it now. I had the wrong mental model of how Rexx stems work (and I suspect some others may also.) I pictured it kind of like C or COBOL multi-dimensional arrays. I pictured Rexx A.B.C.D being essentially analogous to C language A[B,C,D] or COBOL A(B, C, D) albeit with "associative subscripts." But it really is more like a one-dimensional array than an n-dimensional array. A.B.C.D is kind of the same thing as A.ValueOfB_ValueOfC_ValueOfD. The periods just separate the different variable names, making A.B.C.D distinct from A.BCD. B.C.D is one "subscript," not three. There is only one tail, a series of values essentially concatenated with periods, not a hierarchy of tails. The fact that it is one-dimensional explains why A.B. has no special significance. A. is special; it is "all the possible tails of A" but A.B. is just "A.B plus a period." Charles -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] On Behalf Of Seymour J Metz Sent: Saturday, January 30, 2021 7:06 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: Rexx stem variable question https://ia801609.us.archive.org/14/items/REXXLanguage2ndEdition/REXX%20Langu age%20-%202nd%20Edition.pdf "The name begins with a stem (that part of the symbol up to and including the first period)." -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
DE entry on Load Link XCTL and ATTACH
When you have DE entry on any of these macros I assume the system just checks the first name ? thanks -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: STORAGE KEY of loaded executable
Peter Relson wrote: . May I ask why you need to switch to key 9? That is very atypical. I believe that the Storage Protect Override facility, as implemented in z/OS with Key 9, was created so that CICS transactions could avoid accidental overlays of CICS key 8 storage. So unless you're trying super-hard to prevent yourself from overlaying your own key 8 storage, you would not typically get into key 9. Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design Hi Peter! I'm playing around with some tests and was switching keys, and didn't want to mess with authorized code. So I just picked the next one up to 8. There was nothing "special" in my choice of 9. Same kind of idea - trying to just switch to key 9 and make sure things don't blow up, or accidently reference the previously allocated key 8 memory. But I bumped into some references to the previous memory that are intentional/needed... so it's a bit of a squirrely mess at this point. - Dave R. - -- riv...@dignus.comWork: (919) 676-0847 Get your mainframe programming tools at http://www.dignus.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Thank you to LRS and to BIS
Dave, I regret to hear of another mainframe shutting down. It's a shame many companies do not realize exactly what they are doing until it is too late. I don't know about WSU, but the companies I've been involved with who migrated off of IBM mainframes were surprised to find how much it cost to "replace" the horsepower of a mainframe. On a spreadsheet, mainframes look ugly in cost, both iron and software. In actuality, the power produced by that iron and software FAR outperforms any other platform. My most recent shop (that migrated) thought they could replace a z10 with a quad-core Intel system, or so new management said. 100+ quad-core systems later and 100+ software licenses and they still could not meet the published response times the company guaranteed to users. Of course, they were too far down the road to back out at that point, but the migration to a "cheaper platform" ended up costing them about $1.2M/yr more than the mainframe and software licenses. I was quite pleased to see the manager who thought this was such a great idea be fired after completion of the project when the true costs, hardware, software, and response began coming in. JR On Mon, Feb 1, 2021 at 2:11 PM Gibney, Dave wrote: >I wish this wasn't true, but we continue to move towards shutting down > or z/OS systems. Last night I shutdown VPS and DRS from Levi, Ray and > Shoup. I wish to thank LRS for the one month license extension they granted > us at no charge. Our employees did get W2 forms :) >I also shut down our session manager, Netpass from BIS. Bis also > granted us a one month, no charge extension. >I was very please by the support we received from both companies over > the last more than 30 years. > > Dave Gibney > Information Technology Services > Washington State University > > > -- > For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, > send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN > -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: Thank you to LRS and to BIS
Stupidity runs wild...politics and corp. rule -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List On Behalf Of Gibney, Dave Sent: Monday, February 01, 2021 2:11 PM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Thank you to LRS and to BIS ** EXTERNAL EMAIL - USE CAUTION ** I wish this wasn't true, but we continue to move towards shutting down or z/OS systems. Last night I shutdown VPS and DRS from Levi, Ray and Shoup. I wish to thank LRS for the one month license extension they granted us at no charge. Our employees did get W2 forms :) I also shut down our session manager, Netpass from BIS. Bis also granted us a one month, no charge extension. I was very please by the support we received from both companies over the last more than 30 years. Dave Gibney Information Technology Services Washington State University -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN Email Disclaimer This E-mail contains confidential information belonging to the sender, which may be legally privileged information. This information is intended only for the use of the individual or entity addressed above. If you are not the intended recipient, or an employee or agent responsible for delivering it to the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any disclosure, copying, distribution, or the taking of any action in reliance on the contents of the E-mail or attached files is strictly prohibited. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Thank you to LRS and to BIS
I wish this wasn't true, but we continue to move towards shutting down or z/OS systems. Last night I shutdown VPS and DRS from Levi, Ray and Shoup. I wish to thank LRS for the one month license extension they granted us at no charge. Our employees did get W2 forms :) I also shut down our session manager, Netpass from BIS. Bis also granted us a one month, no charge extension. I was very please by the support we received from both companies over the last more than 30 years. Dave Gibney Information Technology Services Washington State University -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: STORAGE KEY of loaded executable
Shmuel posted the relevant section. The really relevant point is that subpool 251 is fetch-protected (and subpool 252 is not) If you switch out of the subpool 251 key (and the module is in subpool 251 storage, not subpool 252), then you have no access to the storage of your program and thus, yes, you will program check attempting to fetch the instruction. If your program is loaded into subpool 252 (key 0, not fetch protected) any key can read it. when a blob of AUTHORIZED code loads something, say, some system exit or something; what is the STORAGE KEY of the memory that code is loaded in. That program may get entered with a KEY=0, but will need access to its own CSECT. The same rules apply. May I ask why you need to switch to key 9? That is very atypical. I believe that the Storage Protect Override facility, as implemented in z/OS with Key 9, was created so that CICS transactions could avoid accidental overlays of CICS key 8 storage. So unless you're trying super-hard to prevent yourself from overlaying your own key 8 storage, you would not typically get into key 9. Peter Relson z/OS Core Technology Design -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: STORAGE KEY of loaded executable
The behavior for REFR is subject to operator and parmlib control. RENT goes into key 0 if the library concatenation is APF. There's no reason to flush the cache, and doing so would be a major performance hit. With luck there an IBM Systems Journal article or redbook on the I-unit of current processors; if not, there should be. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Binyamin Dissen [bdis...@dissensoftware.com] Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 6:05 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: STORAGE KEY of loaded executable On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:34:11 -0500 Thomas David Rivers wrote: :>I have a situation where I LOAD a program, with a PSW KEY of 8, :>then branch to it. :>The program switches to KEY 9, but wants to reference some :>data in the loaded CSECT (say, for example, a =F constant in the :>literal area.) :>This blows up, I'm guessing because the key isn't the same as the :>loaded module's memory (the address appears to be fine.) :>This brings up a couple of questions: :> When you LOAD a program, how do you control the KEY :> for the memory the LOAD'd program occupies? Can you, or :> does z/OS always LOAD (non-auth) programs in KEY=8? If you mark the module refreshable it should nowadays be loaded into SP=252 which is not fetch protected. :> When you switch KEYs, how do you retain access to the :> program's memory for constants and things? IF the program is in fetch protected storage, you do not (as you saw). :>And - to get more complicated - when a blob of AUTHORIZED :> code loads something, say, some system exit or something; what :> is the STORAGE KEY of the memory that code is loaded in. That :> program may get entered with a KEY=0, but will need access to :> it's own CSECT. Well, there MVS acts as a sort of nanny and if you ask for SP=0 when in key zero it really gives you SP=252. You need to specify SP=250 if you want task zero. But the STORAGE macro certainly allows you to allocate storage that you do not have current access to, such as a supervisor state program in key 1 can allocate key 3 or key 8, and should it make an improper reference to the storage it will PIC-4. :> And - It's not quite clear to me, but does the STORAGE KEY :> get examined during the fetch-execute cycle of program :> execution. If my module is in memory with KEY=8, and I change :> the key with an SPKA instruction; can I actually retrieve the :> next instruction to execute? Just where does the key-check occur? I notice that the POPs does not say that it causes a flush of the instruction cache but it would have to do something similar for integrity. Changing the PSW key to something that does not have the ability to fetch from the PSW location should cause a PIC-4. -- Binyamin Dissen http://secure-web.cisco.com/1rk1kzDQ1dsQLEjbFIOdTLgfWKkMk_vMLQiQ6XbnsMve7RFps3Az-Pvi4Ha4_hhLa58Bzcqo3XlG-W4hVLLUB3ZQa1if0tXXo1yla2P3yhSSIYHKPbxfM4X4GeupcpCBAHhazrlRh9D_qk0pV21XDo9ZZypKN_56nB7leTnW_YhTD1ZSoHHcAsN2SX4U4ppIoQtsvEfQgYUs7sqaQXlLrFSwLvpG-a0Y6j_Ki2pog7LntjtEqUi_Hz0-ry0_Xu_zBCRC7mcBJLBp-7k4wBcuax_tDlfokH9M4LwOmIanp541XIxipkGLJEhyC3mY_Xo8aX3T4JKW88vZ_cb6NHHLV4d70zPgf9t0zFFv87-RLIU6-DBAF2XuDLlLdH1t4HKttl5ebSFWJVNifKH-KB65KoACP6YVEDl-DuOsK0-BIFPcysrLi3oRlSOUvXrzhMOJg/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dissensoftware.com Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me, you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain. I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems, especially those from irresponsible companies. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: STORAGE KEY of loaded executable
Using the REFRPROT statement Use the REFRPROT statement type to specify that REFR programs are protected from modification by placing them in key 0, non-fetch protected storage, and page protecting the full pages. Therefore, any parts of the program that are on partial pages are not page-protected. For more information on protectionof REFR programs, see z/OS MVS Program Management: User's Guide and Reference That's Shmuel -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3 From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU] on behalf of Thomas David Rivers [riv...@dignus.com] Sent: Monday, February 1, 2021 7:06 AM To: IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU Subject: Re: STORAGE KEY of loaded executable Binyamin Dissen wrote: >On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:34:11 -0500 Thomas David Rivers >wrote: > > >:> When you LOAD a program, how do you control the KEY >:> for the memory the LOAD'd program occupies? Can you, or >:> does z/OS always LOAD (non-auth) programs in KEY=8? > >If you mark the module refreshable it should nowadays be loaded into SP=252 >which is not fetch protected. > > I have to admit to not looking for it yet - but do you have a pointer to the doc for this? Schmuel described the various Subpools and fetchability attributes which I was able to find via a google text search. These seem to be described in the ATTACHX documentation... but that must also apply to LOAD (I suppose???) Thanks for the pointer about REFRESH (REFR option on binder), I'll look for more info. The downside of REFR is it defeats the use of debuggers which modify the code-stream to insert break-points... but, it is what it is... - Thanks - - Dave R. - -- riv...@dignus.comWork: (919) 676-0847 Get your mainframe programming tools at http://secure-web.cisco.com/1Fca2f4IZyQDVYdr-tstJBM0QiKvOzgzg94WT2h048B5kcwGwpOyiewu9F8yc-DmUE5IxyEX1shdLcwKPemLt6F9sCyPfueLpjDx_8DxXMbGz9S-e_C70qlP4OQjP3eYcoaQoC_iERsWYwJDrhfxOUh1J8gFjYF9kMnNKgf8Nrj8yK4Xb4Ge0Reg3P-yKKCVRlaQztNOgDRtszxarzAZobwBPk07aruzQDx89h57i2M96Hbq9jVg_wS7-tHzzf9H5dtt5uvH51UVkSr6kOGU0WalGJCuZYzWtJ7t2-Sb1QarOI8Mlzh40ZvO2iGhVnKMwICQMQ_BqdW2QV9I8IamrAtmJuB_-kGFQeGa-nCbuqB5vlLyh5T_sR5IZbV4twskfvJf-TmGDMkKun49waLNkEgbHfD3iep5-o0pMk0wwfoP_1ZZ4Rd5AJXk4o8wjmpoo/http%3A%2F%2Fwww.dignus.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: STORAGE KEY of loaded executable
Binyamin Dissen wrote: On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:34:11 -0500 Thomas David Rivers wrote: :> When you LOAD a program, how do you control the KEY :> for the memory the LOAD'd program occupies? Can you, or :> does z/OS always LOAD (non-auth) programs in KEY=8? If you mark the module refreshable it should nowadays be loaded into SP=252 which is not fetch protected. I have to admit to not looking for it yet - but do you have a pointer to the doc for this? Schmuel described the various Subpools and fetchability attributes which I was able to find via a google text search. These seem to be described in the ATTACHX documentation... but that must also apply to LOAD (I suppose???) Thanks for the pointer about REFRESH (REFR option on binder), I'll look for more info. The downside of REFR is it defeats the use of debuggers which modify the code-stream to insert break-points... but, it is what it is... - Thanks - - Dave R. - -- riv...@dignus.comWork: (919) 676-0847 Get your mainframe programming tools at http://www.dignus.com -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
Re: STORAGE KEY of loaded executable
On Sun, 31 Jan 2021 18:34:11 -0500 Thomas David Rivers wrote: :>I have a situation where I LOAD a program, with a PSW KEY of 8, :>then branch to it. :>The program switches to KEY 9, but wants to reference some :>data in the loaded CSECT (say, for example, a =F constant in the :>literal area.) :>This blows up, I'm guessing because the key isn't the same as the :>loaded module's memory (the address appears to be fine.) :>This brings up a couple of questions: :> When you LOAD a program, how do you control the KEY :> for the memory the LOAD'd program occupies? Can you, or :> does z/OS always LOAD (non-auth) programs in KEY=8? If you mark the module refreshable it should nowadays be loaded into SP=252 which is not fetch protected. :> When you switch KEYs, how do you retain access to the :> program's memory for constants and things? IF the program is in fetch protected storage, you do not (as you saw). :>And - to get more complicated - when a blob of AUTHORIZED :> code loads something, say, some system exit or something; what :> is the STORAGE KEY of the memory that code is loaded in. That :> program may get entered with a KEY=0, but will need access to :> it's own CSECT. Well, there MVS acts as a sort of nanny and if you ask for SP=0 when in key zero it really gives you SP=252. You need to specify SP=250 if you want task zero. But the STORAGE macro certainly allows you to allocate storage that you do not have current access to, such as a supervisor state program in key 1 can allocate key 3 or key 8, and should it make an improper reference to the storage it will PIC-4. :> And - It's not quite clear to me, but does the STORAGE KEY :> get examined during the fetch-execute cycle of program :> execution. If my module is in memory with KEY=8, and I change :> the key with an SPKA instruction; can I actually retrieve the :> next instruction to execute? Just where does the key-check occur? I notice that the POPs does not say that it causes a flush of the instruction cache but it would have to do something similar for integrity. Changing the PSW key to something that does not have the ability to fetch from the PSW location should cause a PIC-4. -- Binyamin Dissen http://www.dissensoftware.com Director, Dissen Software, Bar & Grill - Israel Should you use the mailblocks package and expect a response from me, you should preauthorize the dissensoftware.com domain. I very rarely bother responding to challenge/response systems, especially those from irresponsible companies. -- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
