Sorry for the confusion but that's not the question that I was asking. I agree with you on guaranteeing the consistency using the count.
I'm talking about TCB1 using PLO CSDST to store 2 adjacent words (4th & 6th PLO operands) and TCB2 using LM or LG for those same 2 words. There is a very small window between the 2 store's where TCB2 will pick up inconsistent inconsistent values. In other words, the first store has completed and the LM/LG occurs before the second store completes. This window is extremely small because PLO cannot be interrupted and the instruction was prepared before performing the stores. I think the window is so small that even under heavy usage, you would only see an error every couple of months but it does exist. I think TCB2 must also use the PLO compare and load to avoid this situation. Thanks for the great information, Jon Perryman. From: Kenneth Wilkerson <[email protected]> > > >The order of stores is unpredictable except that according to the POM, >operand 2 (in this case, the count) is always stored last. > ---------------------------------------------------------------------- For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions, send email to [email protected] with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
