Why can't we all just eschew obfuscation?
Bill Fairchild
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of
Ted MacNEIL
Sent: Monday, October 24, 2011 5:47 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
You may prefer 'dispatch
On Tue, 25 Oct 2011 11:20:46 + Bill wrote:
Why can't we all just eschew obfuscation?
A modicum of clarity wouldn't go astray either.
Funny how the folks that perhaps have the most reason to muddy the
waters (given corporate resistance to candor) are amongst the most
direct.
Plaudits to
In
capd5f5opl261uej7zc+of64p7lanekdh19wmzxuymtujwoa...@mail.gmail.com,
on 10/24/2011
at 05:41 PM, John Gilmore johnwgilmore0...@gmail.com said:
You're out of line, Shmuel.
Well, someone is.
You may prefer 'dispatch' to 'despatch',
but they are equally legitimate alternative spellings.
Were
Peter Relson's point is an important one.
In my experience almost no one confuses a task with a TCB, but the
ambiguous use of SRB is common. People talk, for example, of
scheduling an SRB, but never of despatching a TCB.
It is probably too late; but it would have been useful to make a
In
capd5f5ryy38n9t9_r2dy2jukcek9o6tmkovtu1o0psnqbqh...@mail.gmail.com,
on 10/24/2011
at 11:03 AM, John Gilmore johnwgilmore0...@gmail.com said:
People talk, for example, of scheduling an SRB, but never of
despatching a TCB.
They do, however, talk of dispatching a TCB, sometimes in
You're out of line, Shmuel. You may prefer 'dispatch' to 'despatch',
but they are equally legitimate alternative spellings.
Moreover, while I should ordinarily let 'excrutiating' pass without
comment, I shall not do so this time. I find no entry in the OED for
it. It is an unambiguous
You two should prpbably get a room.
--
Regards, Gord Tomlin
Action Software International
(a division of Mazda Computer Corporation)
Tel: (905) 470-7113, Fax: (905) 470-6507
On 2011-10-24 17:41, John Gilmore wrote:
You're out of line, Shmuel. You may prefer 'dispatch' to 'despatch',
but they
You may prefer 'dispatch' to 'despatch',
but they are equally legitimate alternative spellings.
They may be legitimate, but NOT equally.
The purpose of communication is to communicate.
NOT to show off your erudition by picking obscure spellings/usage and confusing
people.
Schmuel was probably
There is not much of a real difference. SQA will even overflow into CSA.
It is a matter of definition. Also the manual says to use SQA. In
addition, SQA is automatically page-fixed. I don't know why you'd want
executable code in [E]SQA vice [E]CSA.
Sp 226
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Peter Relson
Sent: Sunday, October 23, 2011 10:06 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
There is not much of a real difference. SQA will even overflow into CSA
In 00e701cc8d19$4d6f9980$e84ecc80$@net, on 10/17/2011
at 06:08 PM, Micheal Butz michealb...@optonline.net said:
Page fault that means it does't have to be fixed unless I just don't
get it
Did you see Jim Mulder's message,
ofc7e976b2.bebda8c2-on8525792c.006db3e2-8525792c.006e2...@us.ibm.com?
In 004a01cc8c3a$1dd08b60$5971a220$@net, on 10/16/2011
at 03:30 PM, Micheal Butz michealb...@optonline.net said:
How can something be addressable in the target address space if is
not in common
If it is in private.
--
Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT
ISO position; see
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Micheal Butz michealb...@optonline.netwrote:
The normal sequence then is common when scheduling to a different address
space
just think about it for a minute. There is no magic. Put yourself in the
SRB's place. In order for it to run, the code has to be
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Chris Craddock crashlu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Micheal Butz
michealb...@optonline.netwrote:
The normal sequence then is common when scheduling to a different address
space
just think about it for a minute. There is no magic.
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Sam Siegel
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 11:32 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
snip
On the other hand; If you are trying to schedule an SRB
into -any-other
thanks
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:55 AM, McKown, John
john.mck...@healthmarkets.com wrote:
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List
[mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf Of Sam Siegel
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 11:32 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 10:03 AM, Chris Craddock crashlu...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Sam Siegel s...@pscsi.net wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Chris Craddock crashlu...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Micheal Butz michealb...@optonline.net
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 11:31 AM, Sam Siegel s...@pscsi.net wrote:
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 9:27 AM, Chris Craddock crashlu...@gmail.com
wrote:
On Sun, Oct 16, 2011 at 4:53 PM, Micheal Butz michealb...@optonline.net
wrote:
snip On the other hand; If you are trying to schedule an SRB into
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu wrote on 10/17/2011
01:03:09 PM:
(E)SQA has the correct storage attributes. (E)SQA is key zero and page
fixed. You should never load SRB code into anything but key zero and the
code should never be paged out, hence my use of the term SQA as a
Does that mean subpool 227 as opposed to to 241
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Jim Mulder
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 4:03 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
IBM Mainframe Discussion List IBM-MAIN
In
cakxahqwwofk2cmeed1akporkeytzvz-_iq5pk1kmi3bb8fx...@mail.gmail.com,
on 10/17/2011
at 11:27 AM, Chris Craddock crashlu...@gmail.com said:
On the other hand; If you are trying to schedule an SRB into
-any-other- address space, then (somehow) you have to make sure
the code will be addressable
Page fault that means it does't have to be fixed unless I just don't get it
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 6:32 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote:
In
cakxahqwwofk2cmeed1akporkeytzvz-_iq5pk1kmi3bb8fx...@mail.gmail.com,
on 10/17/2011
at 11:27 AM, Chris Craddock crashlu...@gmail.com said:
On the other hand; If you are trying to schedule an
, 2011 6:27 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 5:31 PM, Shmuel Metz (Seymour J.)
shmuel+ibm-m...@patriot.net wrote:
In
cakxahqwwofk2cmeed1akporkeytzvz-_iq5pk1kmi3bb8fx...@mail.gmail.com,
on 10/17/2011
at 11:27 AM, Chris Craddock crashlu...@gmail.com said
,
:
:For the SRB code 227
:
: Thank you for all your help
:
:
:
:-Original Message-
:From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
:Of Chris Craddock
:Sent: Monday, October 17, 2011 6:27 PM
:To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
:Subject: Re: SRBEPA
:
:On Mon, Oct 17, 2011 at 5:31
Does anyone know if the SRB rtn has to live common
Thanks in advance
Sent from my iPhone
--
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@bama.ua.edu with the message: GET IBM-MAIN INFO
Michael,
No, it does not.
Tom
- Original Message -
From: Micheal Butz [mailto:michealb...@optonline.net]
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 06:04 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: SRBEPA
Does anyone know if the SRB rtn has to live common
Thanks in advance
Sent
: Micheal Butz [mailto:michealb...@optonline.net]
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 06:04 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: SRBEPA
Does anyone know if the SRB rtn has to live common
Thanks in advance
Sent from my iPhone
, at 6:46 AM, Tom Harper tom.har...@neon.com wrote:
: No, it does not.
: - Original Message -
: From: Micheal Butz [mailto:michealb...@optonline.net]
: Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 06:04 AM
: To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
: Subject: SRBEPA
: Does anyone know if the SRB rtn
So if I have a piece of code in my pgm
E.G. RTN000 I can point at EPA to it
E.G LA R3,RTN000
ST R3,SRBEPA
And set SRBASCB to a different address space
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 16, 2011, at 7:35 AM, Binyamin Dissen bdis...@dissensoftware.com wrote:
On Sun, 16 Oct 2011 07:09:07 -0400
@bama.ua.edu IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
So if I have a piece of code in my pgm
E.G. RTN000 I can point at EPA to it
E.G LA R3,RTN000
ST R3,SRBEPA
And set SRBASCB to a different address space
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 16, 2011, at 7:35 AM, Binyamin Dissen bdis
How can something be addressable in the target address space if is not in
common
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Binyamin Dissen
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 7:36 AM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
On Sun
, October 16, 2011 03:30 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
How can something be addressable in the target address space if is not in
common
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Binyamin Dissen
The normal sequence then is common when scheduling to a different address
space
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Tom Harper
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 3:39 PM
To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
Michael
@bama.ua.edu IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
Subject: Re: SRBEPA
The normal sequence then is common when scheduling to a different address
space
-Original Message-
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List [mailto:IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu] On Behalf
Of Tom Harper
Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 3:39 PM
To: IBM-MAIN
advantages is that if the target
address space goes away, it does not take your code with it.
:
:Tom
:
:- Original Message -
:From: Micheal Butz [mailto:michealb...@optonline.net]
:Sent: Sunday, October 16, 2011 05:53 PM
:To: IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu IBM-MAIN@bama.ua.edu
:Subject: Re: SRBEPA
36 matches
Mail list logo