Thanks to all for the info!
(Summary for the assembler list, since the action was all on IBM-MAIN: It won't
hurt; might affect optimization slightly, but probably not worth worrying
about.)
When I learned about the binder's COMPAT default, I changed my process to
specify COMPAT(CURRENT). So far, so good (it's been a year at least).
sas
On Wed, May 3, 2023 at 12:38 PM Jonathan Scott
wrote:
> The effect of SECTALGN depends on the level of program object
> compatibility requested
The effect of SECTALGN depends on the level of program object
compatibility requested in the binder COMPAT option. By
default, alignment stronger than quadword is rounded up to 4K,
for compatibility with the limitations of the load module
format. I think a COMPAT value of ZOSV2R1 or above is
We have been using SECTALGN(256) with our programs for many years to
ensure they are loaded on a cache line boundary. This causes the
resulting load modules to be page-aligned (and padded to a 4K boundary
which is a waste of storage).
In an effort to trim this waste down, we tried using
