I disagree; good practice is to start your code at offset zero and put your
data in a LOCTR that goes at the end. But if you want to do it the other way,
there is no need to branch around anything.
What is the oldest processor you have to support? If you are allowed to use
relative, then the
> What does CSECT size have to do with base registers?
It's no rocket science. The distance between an instruction and its target
determines whether a relative instruction is possible. If the distance is too
large then you need to access the target via a register.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
I would expect the Binder to detect the error.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List on behalf
of Paul Gilmartin <0014e0e4a59b-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu>
Sent: Tuesday, December 3, 2019
If it's large then you'll need three and if it's too long for Load Relative
Long then you'll need four. I prefer to break things into smaller assemblies
unless there is a good reason to assemble them together.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz
http://mason.gmu.edu/~smetz3
We use TWO LOCTR's, one for constants required to be within 4K of the base
register and a second for constants only referenced by relative long or long
displacement instructions. Useful when your combined constants size exceeds 4K
as it moves the "yonder" fields out of the 4K space.
I wish
On 12/3/2019 11:07 AM, Paul Gilmartin wrote:
Are cross-CSECT relative branches supported? That feels like an
invitation to disaster: errors that can not be detected before
execution.
They have been supported since z/OS 1.7 or 1.8. Very handy to have!!!
--
Phoenix Software International
On 2019-12-03, at 07:10:42, Peter Relson wrote:
>
> ... And, yes, there are cases were relocation applies even to
> use of relative branches. I'll leave that teaser as an exercise for the
> readers.
>
Are cross-CSECT relative branches supported? That feels like an
invitation to disaster:
...inline...
On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 9:10 AM Peter Relson wrote:
> Steve Smith wrote
>
> I found that a couple of
> IBM AMODE 64 callable routines expect R15 to be set to their EPA, although
> most do not. I discovered these when I made the calls using JASL (
>
> I trust you are aware that
On Tue, 3 Dec 2019 09:10:42 -0500, Peter Relson wrote:
>I suggest that you look up what the value in reg 15
>means for this case (it should be documented somewhere), and for the other
>system-assisted linkage cases.
It is documented. For example:
Steve Smith wrote
I found that a couple of
IBM AMODE 64 callable routines expect R15 to be set to their EPA, although
most do not. I discovered these when I made the calls using JASL (
I trust you are aware that "callable" really does mean using "CALL"
(whether in a HLL or, in assembler, by
10 matches
Mail list logo
