Hi Pieter,
Yes I did figure out that to use of MF=E/L or SF=E/L will help to avoid the
SIIS scenario for IBM Macros.
Thx much for your input have a good day Philippe
uot; after upgrade to z13 machine.
Hi John,
Thx much for your input. Yes, I was planning to use newer instructions but I
did realize seeing current design of the applications I am reviewing this will
generate some extra needed time to be sure all is ok and I cannot afford this
in current co
Hi John,
Thx much for your input. Yes, I was planning to use newer instructions but I
did realize seeing current design of the applications I am reviewing this will
generate some extra needed time to be sure all is ok and I cannot afford this
in current context. To implement Baseless pgm or
)
From: Philippe Cloarec
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Date: 12/11/2016 21:16
Subject:Re: SIIS "issue" after upgrade to z13 machine.
Sent by:IBM Mainframe Assembler List
Hi Martin and Rob,
First thx much for your input. Here are 3 links which
Apparently this is needed for some...sure SIIS is NOT new for sure, BUT
performance issue was obviously revealed after upgrade
to a z13, please do read documents referenced in previous updates. Have a good
evening.
ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
> Subject: Re: SIIS "issue" after upgrade to z13 machine.
>
> Hi Rob and Martin,
> Thx for your input. MY primary purpose is to detect SIIS scenarios across
> code I have to scan and to fix them. Code is not complicated I mean you do
>
Hi Rob and Martin,
Thx for your input. MY primary purpose is to detect SIIS scenarios across code
I have to scan and to fix them. Code is not complicated I mean you do have
basic i/o processing against files and some characters and numerics fields are
processed.
There are some Ex(ecute) instr
On 12 November 2016 at 10:10, Philippe Cloarec
wrote:
>
> Since we do talk of CPU cycles savings here I will check for AGI cases and
> their resolution and try to implement instruction grouping as much I can.
>
> From my humble point this is a real topic and all z13 sites having old
> productions
Pieter,
>> The would change most branch instructions to relative branches.
I say not "most" but "all".
Here is a construct that IEABRC (or its X brother) does not handle
well
B *+4*NUMACONS
DC AL4(SOMEWHERE)
DC AL4(OVER_THE_RAINBOW)
.
.
but these are rare and e
Mainframe Assembler List [mailto:ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU] On
Behalf Of Philippe Cloarec
Sent: 12 November 2016 11:10
To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU
Subject: Re: SIIS "issue" after upgrade to z13 machine.
Hi Martin and Rob,
First thx much for your input. Here are 3 links wh
Hi Martin and Rob,
First thx much for your input. Here are 3 links which relate the "issue" and
common code for which we fall into a SIIS scenario:
https://www.google.fr/#q=istream_flash_062606_v4
http://s3-us-west-1.amazonaws.com/watsonwalker/ww/wp-content/uploads/2016/03/06173415/18017-The-Ch
Rob,
excellent example that would be obvious when converting to
"baseless" (and eliminated to be performance-perfect even without going
to RENT)
Martin
Philippe,
>> ... no time to rewrite them as RENT.
Well - if this is the case then i would not invest into using newer
instructions (with the exception of the fairly old "relative &
immediate" instructions)
You need to understand the code to replace instruction sequences.
To make code RENT is f
The example that I have seen was where the customer had a linkage model for
small subroutines that used a static save area and local storage after a
branch at the start of the program. That's painful for small routines
because a lot of the code is in the same cache line and gets hit each time
you s
Hi,
As you may know, there is some kind of performance issue because of SIIS(Store
Into Instruction Stream) after upgrade to a z13 machine in some scenarios. CPU
increase of 30% can be seen in some case, so it may be good to perform to
related changes to avoid issue from reoccuring. Did start
15 matches
Mail list logo