Month: August 2020

An invalid transformation of a COBOL data description entry

August 28, 2020 COBOL , , , , ,

Here’s a subtle gotcha that we saw recently.  A miraculous tool transformed some putrid DELTA generated COBOL code from GOTO soup into human readable form.  Among the transformations that this tool did, were modifications to working storage data declarations (removing unused variables in the source, and simplifying some others).  One of those transformations was problematic.  In that problematic case the pre-transformed declarations were:

This declaration is basically a union of char[8] with a structure that has four char[2]’s, with the COBOL language imposed restriction that the character values can be only numeric (EBCDIC) digits (i.e. ‘\xF0’, …, ‘\xF9’).  In the code in question none of the U044-BIS* variables (neither the first, nor the aliases) were ever used explicitly, but they were passed into another COBOL program as LINKAGE SECTION variables and used in the called program.

Here’s how the tool initially transformed the declaration:

It turns out that dropping that first PIC and removing the corresponding REDEFINES clause, was an invalid transformation in this case, because the code used INITIALIZE on the level 01 object that contained these variables.

On page 177, of the “178 Enterprise COBOL for z/OS: Enterprise COBOL for z/OS, V6.3 Language Reference”, we have:

(copyright IBM)

A data item that is not explicitly referred to in a program. The keyword FILLER is optional. If specified,
FILLER must be the first word following the level-number.

… snip …

In an INITIALIZE statement:
• When the FILLER phrase is not specified, elementary FILLER items are ignored.

The transformation of the code in question would have been correct provided the “INITIALIZE foo” was replaced with “INITIALIZE foo WITH FILLER”.  The bug in the tool was fixed, and the transformed code in question was, in this case, changed to drop all the aliasing:

As a side effect of encountering this issue, I learned a number of things:

  • FILLER is actually a COBOL language keyword, with specific semantics, and not just a variable naming convention.
  • Both ‘INITIALIZE’ and ‘INITIALIZE … WITH FILLER’ are allowed.
  • INITIALIZE (without FILLER) doesn’t do PIC appropriate initialization of FILLER variables (we had binary zeros instead of EBCDIC zeros as a result.)

Listing the code pages for gdb ‘set target-charset’

August 21, 2020 C/C++ development and debugging. , , , , , ,

I wanted to display some internal state as an IBM-1141 codepage, but didn’t know the name to use.  I knew that EBCDIC-US could be used for IBM-1047, but gdb didn’t like ibm-1147:

(gdb) set target-charset EBCDIC-US
(gdb) p (char *)0x7ffbb7b58088
$2 = 0x7ffbb7b58088 "{Jim       ;012}", ' ' <repeats 104 times>
(gdb) set target-charset ibm-1141
Undefined item: "ibm-1141".

I’d either didn’t know or had forgotten that we can get a list of the supported codepages. The help shows this:

(gdb) help set target-charset
Set the target character set.
The `target character set' is the one used by the program being debugged.
GDB translates characters and strings between the host and target
character sets as needed.
To see a list of the character sets GDB supports, type `set target-charset'<TAB>

I had to hit tab twice, but after doing so, I see:

(gdb) set target-charset 
Display all 200 possibilities? (y or n)
1026               866                ARABIC7            CP-HU              CP1129             CP1158             CP1371             CP4517             CP856              CP903
1046               866NAV             ARMSCII-8          CP037              CP1130             CP1160             CP1388             CP4899             CP857              CP904
1047               869                ASCII              CP038              CP1132             CP1161             CP1390             CP4909             CP860              CP905
10646-1:1993       874                ASMO-708           CP1004             CP1133             CP1162             CP1399             CP4971             CP861              CP912
10646-1:1993/UCS4  8859_1             ASMO_449           CP1008             CP1137             CP1163             CP273              CP500              CP862              CP915
437                8859_2             BALTIC             CP1025             CP1140             CP1164             CP274              CP5347             CP863              CP916
500                8859_3             BIG-5              CP1026             CP1141             CP1166             CP275              CP737              CP864              CP918
500V1              8859_4             BIG-FIVE           CP1046             CP1142             CP1167             CP278              CP770              CP865              CP920
850                8859_5             BIG5               CP1047             CP1143             CP1250             CP280              CP771              CP866              CP921
851                8859_6             BIG5-HKSCS         CP1070             CP1144             CP1251             CP281              CP772              CP866NAV           CP922
852                8859_7             BIG5HKSCS          CP1079             CP1145             CP1252             CP282              CP773              CP868              CP930
855                8859_8             BIGFIVE            CP1081             CP1146             CP1253             CP284              CP774              CP869              CP932
856                8859_9             BRF                CP1084             CP1147             CP1254             CP285              CP775              CP870              CP933
857                904                BS_4730            CP1089             CP1148             CP1255             CP290              CP803              CP871              CP935
860                ANSI_X3.110        CA                 CP1097             CP1149             CP1256             CP297              CP813              CP874              CP936
861                ANSI_X3.110-1983   CN                 CP1112             CP1153             CP1257             CP367              CP819              CP875              CP937
862                ANSI_X3.4          CN-BIG5            CP1122             CP1154             CP1258             CP420              CP850              CP880              CP939
863                ANSI_X3.4-1968     CN-GB              CP1123             CP1155             CP1282             CP423              CP851              CP891              CP949
864                ANSI_X3.4-1986     CP-AR              CP1124             CP1156             CP1361             CP424              CP852              CP901              CP950
865                ARABIC             CP-GR              CP1125             CP1157             CP1364             CP437              CP855              CP902              auto
*** List may be truncated, max-completions reached. ***

There’s my ibm-1141 in there, but masquerading as CP1141, so I’m able to view my data in that codepage, and lookup the value of characters of interest in 1141:

(gdb) set target-charset CP1141
(gdb) p (char *)0x7ffbb7b58088
$3 = 0x7ffbb7b58088 "äJim       ;012ü", ' ' <repeats 104 times>
(gdb) p /x '{'
$4 = 0x43
(gdb) p /x '}
Unmatched single quote.
(gdb) p /x '}'
$5 = 0xdc
(gdb) p /x *(char *)0x7ffbb7b58088
$6 = 0xc0

I’m able to conclude that the buffer in question appears to be in CP1047, not CP1141 (the first character, which is supposed to be ‘{‘ doesn’t have the CP1141 value of ‘{‘).

Using the debugger to understand COBOL level 88 semantics.

August 10, 2020 COBOL , ,

COBOL has an enumeration mechanism called a LEVEL-88 variable.  I found a few aspects of this counter-intuitive, as I’ve mentioned in a few previous posts.  With the help of the debugger, I now think I finally understand what’s going on.  Here’s an example program that uses a couple of LEVEL-88 variables:

We can use a debugger to discover the meaning of the COBOL code. Let’s start by single stepping past the first MOVE statement to just before the SET MY88-VAR-1:

Here, I’m running the program LZ000550 from a PDS named COBRC.NATIVE.LZ000550. We expect EBCDIC spaces (‘\x40’) in the FEEDBACK structure at this point and that’s what we see:

Line stepping past the SET statement, our structure memory layout now looks like:

By setting the LEVEL-88 variable to TRUE all the memory starting at the address of feedback is now overwritten by the numeric value 0x0000000141C33A3BL. If we continue the program, the SYSOUT ends up looking like:

This condition was expected.
This condition was expected.

The first ‘IF MY88-VAR-1 THEN’ fires, and after the subsequent ‘SET MY88-VAR-2 TO TRUE’, the second ‘IF MY88-VAR-2 THEN’ fires. The SET overwrites the structure memory at the point that the 88 was declared, and an IF check of that same variable name checks if the memory in that location has the value in the 88 variable. It does not matter what the specific layout of the structure is at that point. We see that an IF check of the level-88 variable just tests whether or not the value at that address has the pattern specified in the variable. In this case, we have only on level-88 variable with the given name in the program, so the ‘IF MY88-VAR-2 OF feedback’ that was used was redundant, and could have been coded as just ‘IF MY88-VAR-2’, or could have been coded as ‘IF MY88-VAR-2 OF CONDITION-TOKEN-VALUE of Feedback’

We can infer that the COBOL code’s WORKING-STORAGE has the following equivalent C++ layout:

   short SEVERITY;
   short MSG_NO;
   char CASE_SEV_CTL;
   char FACILITY_ID[3];

enum my88_vars
   MY88_VAR_1 = 0x0000000141C33A3BL,
   MY88_VAR_2 = 0x0000000241C33A3BL

struct feedback
   union {
      my88_vars e;
   } u;
   int I_S_INFO;

and that the control flow of the program can be modeled as the following:

feedback f;

int main()
   memset( &f, 0x40, sizeof(f) );
   f.u.e = MY88_VAR_1;
   if ( f.u.e == MY88_VAR_2 )
   if ( f.u.e == MY88_VAR_1 )

   f.u.e = MY88_VAR_2;
   if ( f.u.e == MY88_VAR_1 )
   if ( f.u.e == MY88_VAR_2 )

   return 0;

Things also get even more confusing if the LEVEL-88 variable specifies less bytes than the structure that it is embedded in.  In that case, SET of the variable pads out the structure with spaces and a check of the variable also looks for those additional trailing spaces:

The CONDITION-TOKEN-VALUE object uses a total of 8 bytes.  We can see the spaces in the display of the FEEDBACK structure if we look in the debugger:

See the four trailing 0x40 spaces here.

Incidentally, it can be hard to tell what the total storage requirements of a COBOL structure is by just looking at the code, because the mappings between digits and storage depends on the usage clauses.  If the structure also uses REDEFINES clauses (embedded unions), as was the case in the program that I was originally looking at, the debug output is also really nice to understand how big the various fields are, and where they are situated.

Here are a few of the lessons learned:

  • You might see a check like ‘IF MY88-VAR-1 THEN’, but nothing in the program explicitly sets MY88-VAR-1. It is effectively a global variable value that is set as a side effect of some other call (in the real program I was looking at, what modified this “variable” was actually a call to CEEFMDA, a LE system service.) We have pass by reference in the function calls so it can be a reverse engineering task to read any program and figure out how any given field may have been modified, and that doesn’t get any easier by introducing LEVEL-88 variables into the mix.
  • This effective enumeration mechanism is not typed in any sense. Correct use of a LEVEL-88 relies on the variables that follow it to have the appropriate types. In this case, the ‘IF MY88-VAR-1 THEN’ is essentially shorthand for:
  • There is a disconnect between the variables modified or checked by a given LEVEL-88 variable reference that must be inferred by the context.
  • An IF check of a LEVEL-88 variable may include an implicit check of the trailing part of the structure with EBCDIC spaces, if the fields that follow the 88 variable take more space than the value of the variable. Similarly, seting such a variable to TRUE may effectively memset a trailing subset of the structure to EBCDIC spaces.
  • Exactly what is modified by a given 88 variable depends on the context.  For example, if the level 88 variables were found in a copybook, and if I had a second structure that had the same layout as FEEDBACK, with both structures including that copybook, then I’d have two instances of this “enumeration”, and would need a set of “OF foo OF BAR” type clauses to disambiguate things.  Level 88 variables aren’t like a set of C defines.  Their meaning is context dependent, even if they masquerade as constants.

Small update to “Basic Statistical Mechanics” is now live.

August 8, 2020 Uncategorized

A new version of these notes is now posted, available on amazon, leanpub, and as a free pdf:

phy452.V0.1.12.pdf, Wed Aug 5, 2020 (commit 7bbcdf66b26e950fa01ae6cbae86f987bc2c8d49)

  • Fix hyphens in listing, typos in bio.
  • Remove appendix part so that the index and bib aren’t grouped with the appendix.
  • Tweak the preface and backcover
  • Group intro probability text together, and expand on probability distribution definition.
  • Remove singlton part heading so that chapters are the highest level.
  • Fix pdfbookmarks for contents and list of figures (so that they don’t show up under the preface)
  • Streamline FrontBack specialization.

These are mostly cosmetic changes, where my primary objective was to correct the bash listing that shows the reader how to make their own git clone of the book text.


Leanpub editions of my books.

August 5, 2020 Uncategorized ,

I’d had a leanpub version of my geometric algebra book available for a while and have now added editions of all my older class notes compilations that I have on amazon.  My complete leanpub selection now looks like:

I believe that leanpub essentially provides a pdf to the purchaser (I haven’t tried buying a copy to verify), and I give the pdfs away for free, so you (and I) might ask why somebody would opt to buy such a copy?

There are a few possible reasons that I can think of:

  1. Many of the leanpub purchases have been above the minimum price, so at least some of the purchasers are compensating proportionally to their personal valuation of the material, and aren’t strictly trying to buy for the minimum price.
  2. A leanpub purchase is subscription like.  Anybody that purchases a copy will automatically receive any updates made without having to check for a new version manually.
  3. There is a per-book forum available for each of the books (if the author enables it.)  I didn’t realize that feature was available, and have now enabled the forum for my geometric algebra book.  I’ve also enabled a forum for each of the class notes compilations as I configured them.
  4. The purchaser did not know that I also offer the pdf for free, and found the title in leanpub search, not through my website where I make that obvious.

I’ve been putting all my leanpub proceeds into my kiva loan portfolio, so if somebody had the bad luck to buy a copy of my book because of (4) above, I don’t feel very guilty about it.

%d bloggers like this: