My point with ETCRE was that it is the start of the black box. You can't just
depend upon this being a hardware only instruction nor can you rely upon your
PC routine to be started directly from the instruction. IBM could easily pass
your routine's address in another parm. Only someone who's looked at ETDEF
could say for sure.
Jon.
On Thursday, August 29, 2019, 10:40:41 AM PDT, Seymour J Metz
<sme...@gmu.edu> wrote:
ETCRE et al are part of the setup prior to issuing the PC instruction; the
actual implementation of the PC is a black box and need not be the same between
models, as long as it complies with PoOps.
From: IBM Mainframe Discussion List <IBM-MAIN@LISTSERV.UA.EDU> on behalf of Jon
Perryman
For "who will perform the translation process", it's not going to be clear.
First, rather than translation, the PC instruction builds the environment from
the token. ETDEF defines the PC environment but ETCRE or ETCON could easily
insert calls into the environment entry without us being aware. P/OPS only
tells us the hardware side and we don't have access to the internals (e.g.
establishing ARR). So the answer is we can't say for sure.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
For IBM-MAIN subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@listserv.ua.edu with the message: INFO IBM-MAIN
