On Tue, 5 Aug 2025 12:56:02 +0000, Peter Relson wrote: ><snip>I repeat, RMODE is irrelevant unless specifically mentioned in the doc. >The OP said it was not mentioned in WTO, therefore RMODE is irrelevant!</snip> >Sorry, but very wrong! >If RMODE 64 is not mentioned, then you are expected NOT to invoke the service >from a program above 2G.This is the same as: if AMODE 64 is not mentioned, >then you are expected NOT to invoke the service in AMODE 64. It is similar to: >if data above the bar is not mentioned as valid even if AMODE 64 is valid then >you are expected NOT to use data above the bar. >Might an RMODE 64 invocation work? Yes. Fairly likely if the service is >SVC-entered or PC-entered, not as likely if it is branch-entered.Might an >RMODE 64 invocation stop working (i.e., break) at any point in the future >(including. albeit unlikely, in service)? Yes >Even in the cases where it appears to "work", not everything might be as >desired (such as diagnostic data about the return address of a caller within a >log or trace or message) >If you want to risk it (and put your customers at such risk), that cannot be >stopped. ><snip>The only 2 services that are documented as RMODE64 are load and synch ></snip>That is not correct (i.e., it is incomplete)For example, GETMAIN >documents: >| RMODE: | For SVC-entry, includes 64-bit | > How many subscribers to this list are likely to see the joyous day when all services are supported in the highest available AMODE/RMDE (still 64 by then?), and even the initiator EXECs PGMs with 8-byte parameter addresses and they can be oblivious to the lower modes?
I fear I won't make it. Isn't Linux already there? -- gil ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
