- Community Home
- >
- Servers and Operating Systems
- >
- Operating Systems
- >
- Operating System - OpenVMS
- >
- Re: DECnet Phase IV porting issue
Categories
Company
Local Language
Forums
Discussions
Forums
- Data Protection and Retention
- Entry Storage Systems
- Legacy
- Midrange and Enterprise Storage
- Storage Networking
- HPE Nimble Storage
Discussions
Discussions
Discussions
Forums
Discussions
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
- BladeSystem Infrastructure and Application Solutions
- Appliance Servers
- Alpha Servers
- BackOffice Products
- Internet Products
- HPE 9000 and HPE e3000 Servers
- Networking
- Netservers
- Secure OS Software for Linux
- Server Management (Insight Manager 7)
- Windows Server 2003
- Operating System - Tru64 Unix
- ProLiant Deployment and Provisioning
- Linux-Based Community / Regional
- Microsoft System Center Integration
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Discussion Boards
Community
Resources
Forums
Blogs
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Mark Topic as New
- Mark Topic as Read
- Float this Topic for Current User
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Printer Friendly Page
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-08-2012 05:07 AM
05-08-2012 05:07 AM
Hi,
I'm trying to port some very old stuff from VAX to I64.
The software is written in VAX Fortran and uses DECnet IV nontransparent task-to-task communiation.
The software compiles fine on I64 using HP Fortran V8.2 but during runtime I get
%SYSTEM-F-BADPARAM, bad parameter value
This comes from a call to $QIO where the program tries to register itself as a DECnet object
(function code IO$_ACPCONTROL)
Attached you may find a reproducer.
Any help would be greatly appreciated.
Solved! Go to Solution.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-08-2012 06:29 AM
05-08-2012 06:29 AM
Re: DECnet Phase IV porting issue
My very first thought would be alignment when switching architectures. Since you can't use a supplied library module (I don't know why that is omitted from FORSYSDEF - maybe there is an SDL equivalent that you could use the freeware SDL package to generate an include file for it), you should probably wrap your structure definitions with
!DEC$ OPTIONS/NOWARN/ALIGN=(RECORDS=PACKED,COMMONS=PACKED)
!DEC$ END OPTIONS
like the library modules do.
Since you are using your own PARAMETER definitions, I'd also verify them against the values on your target system, but I'd be very surprised if they have changed - but, trust AND verify :-).
If that fails to resolve it, I'd start with a /NOOPT/DEBUG version and examine everything, including addresses, just before and after the call.
I'd also look at promoting any of the non-record I*2 values just from a performance perspective and change the event flag to the ENF value - it doesn't look like you use it for anything.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-08-2012 10:00 AM - edited 05-08-2012 10:01 AM
05-08-2012 10:00 AM - edited 05-08-2012 10:01 AM
SolutionMike is absolutely right: you need to enclose the DECLNAME Structure definition like this:
!DEC$ OPTIONS/NOWARN/ALIGN=(RECORDS=PACKED,COMMONS=PACKED)
STRUCTURE /DECLNAME/
BYTE FUNCTION
UNION
MAP
INTEGER*4 FILLER ! "name" case
END MAP
MAP
INTEGER*4 OBJ_NUM ! "name" case
END MAP
END UNION
END STRUCTURE
!DEC$ END OPTIONS
Otherwise the NFB is not filled correctly, because the INTEGER*4 longword is put at the next LONGWORD boundary after the BYTE. This has nothing to do with Itanium, it also fails on Alpha.
Volker.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-09-2012 12:02 AM
05-09-2012 12:02 AM
Re: DECnet Phase IV porting issue
Thank you very much.
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-09-2012 12:04 AM
05-09-2012 12:04 AM
Re: DECnet Phase IV porting issue
Mike, Volker,
I tried to give you 10 points, but I'm still fighting with this user interface.
Sorry
- Mark as New
- Bookmark
- Subscribe
- Mute
- Subscribe to RSS Feed
- Permalink
- Report Inappropriate Content
05-11-2012 02:28 AM
05-11-2012 02:28 AM
Re: DECnet Phase IV porting issue
>I tried to give you 10 points,
One Kudos ~= a bunny.