If I remember correctly, the timestamp runs from 1900 to 2042,
checking 1 high bit gives you 2 X 71 year epochs, 2 high bits gives 4
X 35.5 year epochs, 3 high bits gives 8 X 15.75 year epochs, 4 high
bits 16 X 7.875 year epochs.

Suggest checking 2 high bits, treating current and past 2 epochs (71-
106.5 years) as valid, and the next epoch as past data that needs to
be cleared before reuse.  From now to 2042, the future epoch of
b'00'did represent 1900-1935 so no past data, but starting in 2042 the
next epoch of B'01' currently used to represent 1936-1971 and might
have some data to be flagged.

On Wed, Jun 12, 2024 at 6:56 AM Peter Relson <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> <snip>
> Am I correct in understanding that on current hardware an overflow from the 
> TOD
> will be carried into the Epoch Index, but only once?
> </snip>
> No, that is not correct. The Epoch Index gets incremented upon the 
> wrap/overflow, for as many epochs as happen.
>
> <snip>
> Am I correct in understanding that the Clock Comparator remains in 64-bit
> TOD format?  How will intervals spanning that time in 2042 be handled?
> </snip>
> Yes, it is true. The short answer to the second question is "correctly".
> As a hint, try doing 64-bit arithmetic that subtracts a before-wrap 8-byte 
> TOD value from an after-wrap 8-byte TOD value and see what you get.
>
> Peter Relson
> z/OS Core Technology Design
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN



-- 
Mike A Schwab, Springfield IL USA
Where do Forest Rangers go to get away from it all?

----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN

Reply via email to