Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

The z/OS system Abend code list: https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.1.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r1.ieah700/h7scc.htm gives no message for S0D0 and S0D1, which would be generated by segment and page exception. In the normal case, the system processes those as segment or page faults,

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

After further consideration, I think I must belatedly award you first place. LURA not only is the quickest, easiest, and fastest, it's also perfectly safe. As far as I can tell, you're the only one that came up with it. sas On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 6:36 PM Keven wrote: > > > > > I’ve

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

Hi Keven, You might be the 5th, but the response is respected I didn't know the LURA and STURA instructions but these require privops access From other responses I conclude that S0C5 is not possible with DAT on, but I still feel that it's more to do with storage key protection than DAT

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

I proved it. IEA995I SYMPTOM DUMP OUTPUT 909 SYSTEM COMPLETION CODE=0C5 REASON CODE=0005 TIME=19.17.34 SEQ=01808 CPU= ASID=0038 PSW AT TIME OF ERROR 030C1001 FE8E8EA8 ILC 4 INTC 05 NO ACTIVE MODULE FOUND NAME=UNKNOWN DATA AT PSW IS UNAVAILABLE AT THIS TIME GR 0:

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

I’ve developed code that executed LURA and STURA instructions and I saw a few S0C5s along the way.  I remember thinking at the time that I had finally filled in my S0Cx card (I.e., I had at that point written code that had non-deliberately ABENDed with a S0C1 through S0C9.

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

I think that's the winner! Much easier than stepping into DAT-off on one's own (unless you happen to actually still have a V=R region). John McKown's suggestion is nice for runner-up. sas On Wed, Jan 29, 2020 at 5:12 PM Keith Moe wrote: > Yes. It is still possible to generate a REAL 0C5

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

In fact J is impossible at assembly time, right? J *+10 generates a jump instruction with an assembled offset of 5, right? That's how they get +/- 65K into 16 bits. So J *+9 should generate an assembly error. Even if you tried to code it yourself in hex, it's not possible. Right? B (0,r) and

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

Well, yes, it may be possible I have a feeling that this is storage key related which is newer than DAT Melvyn - Original Message - From: "John McKown" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 9:47 PM Subject: Re: Does S0C5 still exist ? Cheat -- use the ABEND macro. Yes, you can

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

No, that's a S0C6 - Original Message - From: "John Melcher" <0a33cad2fca2-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu> To: Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 9:33 PM Subject: Re: Does S0C5 still exist ? Jdoesn't do it? -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List On

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

Yes. It is still possible to generate a REAL 0C5 (Addressing Exception) abend. To do so, you must be in DAT OFF mode. z/OS has DAT OFF Services and until you have a full 64-bit addressable real storage, an 0C5 can occur. Back in 2005, I accidentally generated one in a DAT OFF service call.

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

Cheat -- use the ABEND macro. Yes, you can use it to generate system anend codes. PIC 5 is basically that a physical address doesn't exist, so I doubt you can generate it DAT on. On Wed, Jan 29, 2020, 15:11 Melvyn Maltz < 072265160664-dmarc-requ...@listserv.uga.edu> wrote: > As part of a

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

Jdoesn't do it? -Original Message- From: IBM Mainframe Assembler List On Behalf Of Joe Dolcini Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 3:32 PM To: ASSEMBLER-LIST@LISTSERV.UGA.EDU Subject: Re: Does S0C5 still exist ? *** External email: Verify sender before opening attachments or

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

I thought it was leftover from MVT (non-virtual) days. I found the following S0C5 – Addressing Exception Description An address developed and used by the ABENDing program lies outside of the available virtual storage on the processor. Possible Causes Indexing, Subcripting outside the

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

Thanks Steve, Yes, it's in the Manual, but does it exist is my question ? And yes, Addressing Melvyn - Original Message - From: "Steve Thompson" To: Sent: Wednesday, January 29, 2020 9:23 PM Subject: Re: Does S0C5 still exist ? Get the PoOP and look at Program Interrupt Code

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

I am speculating some, but it seems to me that a S0C5 would be impossible with DAT-on unless somebody screwed up the DAT tables. If you get into real mode, then it should be possible to generate an addressing exception easily enough. Whether z/OS would turn that into a S0C5 nowadays is

Re: Does S0C5 still exist ?

Get the PoOP and look at Program Interrupt Code (PIC) 5. I can't remember off the top of my head if this is addressing or specification exception. Regards, Steve Thompson On 1/29/20 4:11 PM, Melvyn Maltz wrote: As part of a training exercise I was challenged to write code that abended S0C5

Does S0C5 still exist ?

As part of a training exercise I was challenged to write code that abended S0C5 While I'm very skilled at writing Assembler code that abends, I failed in this case :-( With the advent of much more secure storage allocation (if someone mentions CICS Storage Violations the men in white coats will