On Thu, Jun 18, 2020 at 12:10 PM esst...@juno.com <esst...@juno.com> wrote:
> Hello,. > I'm exploring the use of Sub System Interface > . > I understand a resource manager is the preferred method for handling > specific ending address space termination. > . > To be clear I'm interested in understanding SSI Function Call 08 and > not a Resource Manager. > . > If this function call is defined by a subsystem, the only variables > presented > to the function routine are: and SSENASID (ASID of Ending Address Space), > SSENASCB (Address Of Ending Address Space ASCB), > SSENJBNM (Job Name List Pointer) of the SSEN Control Block. > . > It is my understanding This Function Routine would need to examine some or > all > of the above variables in the SSEN Control Block. The Function Routine > would need > to compare these variables against some previously stored values that the > sub-systems > function routine is interested in. > . > These "values of interest" would need to be possibly stored in some common > storage. > My question is how does SSI Function Call 08 determine where the "values > of interest" > are stored ? Or Where they are stored ? > . > The subsystem may be interested in the termination of several address > spaces. > You wouldn't design a unique SSI Function Call 8 routine for each address > space of interest. > . > One technique that comes to mind is the use of a System Level Name Token > Pair (NTP). > The Name of the NTP could contain the specific Job Name of Interest and > the tokens > could contain the "values of interest" to compare to SSENASID (ASID of > Ending Address Space), > and/or SSENASCB (Address Of Ending Address Space ASCB). > . > Is there any assurance that a System Level Name Token is available when > termination is started ? > I'm not totally sure, but I _assume_ so due to this: https://www.ibm.com/support/knowledgecenter/en/SSLTBW_2.3.0/com.ibm.zos.v2r3.ieaa200/ieantrt.htm > Is the System Level even available to this routine ? > There is nothing that I can see in the documentation which says YES or NO. How was this validation coordinated prior to the existence of Name Token > Pairs ? > It was _ugly_. I saw one way, long ago, where a type 2 SVC was used. These SVCs are LPA resident. The code would first do a page fix on a data area inside itself so that it would never be paged out or page released. It would then do a GETMAIN for common storage. Next, it would remove page store protection on that data area page & store the address of the common area inside. Lastly, it would reprotect the data area page. {shudder} Also, some code tried to share use of the CWA field in the CSA. But this took a lot of vendor coordination. Today's use of a SSVT is much nicer. > . > Paul D'Angelo > . > -- People in sleeping bags are the soft tacos of the bear world. Maranatha! <>< John McKown ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
