Re: More fun with native RLA SETLL on an SQL view with a WHERE clause -- MI400

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

jamesl@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx wrote:

CRPence wrote:

And I expect an intercepted call should have the value(s) of interest. A lot easier than guessing how to specify it, I
would think.

I've got a hunch that just because DMCGETD didn't like 01 for an
option doesn't mean that DMCGET won't like it.

(Kind of a pain in the butt talking about these things in
abstract, without any source in front of me to remind me of what
things are called).

(And as for hacking into the SEPT, who do I look like? Leif?) ;-p

At least get a trace of a valid SETLL *START to find out which of the two needs to implement that I\O request; i.e. no reason to play with the control or option list of DMCGET processing if according to the trace results, the request needs to be handled by the DMCGETD processing.

Updating the EPT for a program is probably the easiest patch ever; i.e. replace a pointer with a pointer. Simple to verify the patch too, with a DMPSYSOBJ QINSEPT SPACE( xx 10) and DSPSPLF QPSRVDMP SPLNBR(*LAST).

Regards, Chuck

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2024 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.