Ros-dev October 2009

ros-dev@reactos.org

26 participants
36 discussions

Reactos and MinWin
by Gerard Murphy 03 Nov '09

03 Nov '09

I've recently been taking an interest in MinWin, especially as it's now visible in Windows 7, and I want to bring up the possibility of introducing something similar into ReactOS. I know some of you will be familiar with WinWin and I know at least one of you will know quite a bit more about it than I do, but for those who don't here's an overview. What is WinMin? MinWin is an internal project at Microsoft that manifested around the time of the Vista rewrite. Very basically explained, the aim is to detangle the very core components from the full operating system, resulting in something which can be built separately and leaving just enough components for a working system. This minimal operating system can then boot and be tested separately or be built as part of the full OS and tested in internally as before. The main problem in doing this, and one of the main benefits in solving it, is module dependencies. By simply cutting out the bottom part of the OS you're left with modules which potentially call out to other modules which may now be missing. If these dependencies aren't understood you have the possibility of an unstable OS as you never know where a code path may lead. It also means you need to build more components to get the thing to link, which also undermines one of the reasons for doing it. What Microsoft did is to draw up a dependency tree and structure it in a layered hierarchy. Modules were then rearranged to make architectural sense according to the NT design and a top layer was decided upon. API call were then rewritten within this hierarchy such that anything in one layer would only call API's in the layers below it. Therefore if something in layer 8 called something in layer 7 which then called something in layer 12, the APIs would be fixed to only use APIs at or below its level according to the hierarchy. You're then left with a clean line where nothing calls out and you have a tightly bound core OS which is completely independent from anything. What is essentially left in Microsoft's WinMin is what people class as Cutlers NT along with supporting components to get a bootable system. The main components are: The kernel (main kernel, not the full ntoskrnl module), parts of the executive, memory manager, networking, a file system driver and core drivers (basc IO and Bus, etc) This is then exposed in usermode by 2 dlls, ntdll.dll and the new kernelbase.dll. On top of this you have a console for issuing commands. This comprises of the full OS and amounts to about 25Mb on disk and has around a 40Mb working set. Let's quickly explain the new kernelbase dll. As many of the API's in the lower level dlls such as kernel32 and advapi32 were targeting functionality which wasn't in WinMin, it was decided to pull out any of the API's which were required to exercise WinMin and put them into kernelbase. This dll could then be used when building a running WinMin to provide all the functionality this kernel offered. The dlls which had their APIs removed now forwarded their call onto kernelbase so from a user perspective, nothing had changed. Microsoft went a step further and designed a new technology around virtual dlls. They split functionality of dlls into 'api sets' These can now be seen in Win 7 in the system32 dir with the prefix 'api-ms-win-core-<function>-<num of>-1-0.dll'. WinMin components now link against these virtual dlls which load up the real libs listed in apisetschema.dll. However this involves modification to the loader and I don't think it's something worth us considering right now. What are the reasons for doing this? For a start, it's a much better design from an engineering perspective. The more software you have running on a system the more noise is created and the more things can interfere with each other. It gives us a base to innovate with without worrying about affecting anything outside. It gives us a more reliable base for the OS and a better platform to run comprehensive and efficient tests. It makes us more attractive to external companies as we would have a slick NT compatible kernel ready for companies to build their products on, especially embedded applications. With a few more additional items such as the base win32 subsystem, we'd have something along the lines of a stripped out ServerCore or Windows PE. This is only a quick overview for discussion purposes, but it outlines the main design and goals of WinMin. Comments, questions, concerns and gripes welcome J Ged.

10 16

Commit by janderwald :: r43874 reactos/dll/directx/dsound_new/ (17 files): * Start rewrite of DirectSound
by Javier Agustìn Fernàndez Arroyo 31 Oct '09

31 Oct '09

hi, i wonder if this commit should be sync'ed in the reactx branch...... (and, if DSound should be synced as a whole in there) im not dev, so its up to you devs.... And if not.. why?

2 1

Using alternative compilers to build ReactOS...
by King InuYasha 31 Oct '09

31 Oct '09

Hello, I had noticed that some of the developers are working pretty vigorously to get off of requiring GCC. I don't pretend to understand what that is about, and I honestly would like to know.. However, I just wanted to list a couple of alternative open source C/C++ compilers that could probably be used with ReactOS. Of course, what do I know, I'm just a newbie at being a C++ programmer... Anyway, the two compilers are: * OpenWatcom ( http://openwatcom.org/index.php/Main_Page ) * LLVM 2.6 w/clang ( http://llvm.org/ )

1 0

Re: [ros-dev] Re : [ros-diffs] [sginsberg] 43789: - Replace broken implementation of HalpCalibrateStallExecution with a new implementation by a mysterious HAL ninja and myself. The old implementation calculated the stall count factor incorrectly and
by Steven Edwards 28 Oct '09

28 Oct '09

On Tue, Oct 27, 2009 at 9:32 AM, KJK::Hyperion <hackbunny(a)reactos.org> wrote: > Alex Ionescu wrote: >> I bet Hitler would've said the same at Nuremberg.... > > he wouldn't have, unlike us he had written a specification beforehand Too funny. I love the Mein Kampf as an example of how to do a proper system design specification ;) -- Steven Edwards "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo

2 2

Re: [ros-dev] Microsoft PDC
by Love Nystrom 27 Oct '09

27 Oct '09

Ged Murphy wrote: > I’ll be attending this year’s Microsoft PDC in Los Angeles > and I should be there between 16th November and 20th November. You absolutely have to attend the session with Mark Russinovitch "Windows 7 and Windows Server 2008 R2 Kernel Changes". See if you can dig up something useful for our baby ROS. (When they released NT, at least they gave us "Inside Windows NT" :) Oh, and "C++ Forever: Interactive Applications in the Age of Manycore" could be vaguely interesting I guess (the multicore bits). All the other sessions seem to be boring application stuff, C#, ASP.NET, SQL and all that goop. Don't snore on the sessions ;) Rock on // Love __________ Information from ESET Smart Security, version of virus signature database 4549 (20091027) __________ The message was checked by ESET Smart Security. http://www.eset.com

1 0

Microsoft PDC
by Ged Murphy 27 Oct '09

27 Oct '09

I'll be attending this year's Microsoft PDC in Los Angeles and I should be there between 16th November and 20th November. If anyone else is going and wants to meet up for a chat at the conference or a beer in the evening drop me a mail. Cheers, Ged.

2 2

Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [sginsberg] 43789: - Replace broken implementation of HalpCalibrateStallExecution with a new implementation by a mysterious HAL ninja and myself. The old implementation calculated the stall count factor incorrectly and produced bogus resu
by Gabriel ilardi 27 Oct '09

27 Oct '09

This commit introduces a noticeable delay in VirtualBox: 1) When booting from the CD to install ROS, after FreeLDR has initially loaded and the screen becomes black, here I notice a delay of 6~7 seconds until I see the blue screen to choose the language in usetup. Before the commit it was about 1 sec. 2) In second stage when loading UniATA, it stays there for about 4-5 seconds, there was no delay before. Best regards, Gabriel. > Date: Tue, 27 Oct 2009 01:03:41 +0000 > To: ros-diffs(a)reactos.org > From: sginsberg(a)svn.reactos.org > Subject: [ros-diffs] [sginsberg] 43789: - Replace broken implementation of HalpCalibrateStallExecution with a new implementation by a mysterious HAL ninja and myself. The old implementation calculated the stall count factor incorrectly and produced bogus results that were off by several thousand, and varied by as much for each boot, and can best be described as "rand() made complicated". The new implementation installs its own RTC interrupt handler to accurately calculate the stall scale factor, all done in assembler instead of broken C. Fixes the hang at boot when initializing Uniata as stalls no longer takes 10 times or more as long to execute then they should. > > Author: sginsberg > Date: Tue Oct 27 02:03:41 2009 > New Revision: 43789 > > URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=43789&view=rev > Log: > - Replace broken implementation of HalpCalibrateStallExecution with a new implementation by a mysterious HAL ninja and myself. The old implementation calculated the stall count factor incorrectly and produced bogus results that were off by several thousand, and varied by as much for each boot, and can best be described as "rand() made complicated". The new implementation installs its own RTC interrupt handler to accurately calculate the stall scale factor, all done in assembler instead of broken C. Fixes the hang at boot when initializing Uniata as stalls no longer takes 10 times or more as long to execute then they should. > > Modified: > trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/halinit.c > trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/systimer.S > trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/timer.c > > Modified: trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/halinit.c > URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos/trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/halinit… > ============================================================================== > --- trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/halinit.c [iso-8859-1] (original) > +++ trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/halinit.c [iso-8859-1] Tue Oct 27 02:03:41 2009 > @@ -97,11 +97,11 @@ > /* Force initial PIC state */ > KfRaiseIrql(KeGetCurrentIrql()); > > + /* Setup busy waiting */ > + HalpCalibrateStallExecution(); > + > /* Initialize the clock */ > HalpInitializeClock(); > - > - /* Setup busy waiting */ > - HalpCalibrateStallExecution(); > > /* Fill out the dispatch tables */ > HalQuerySystemInformation = HaliQuerySystemInformation; > > Modified: trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/systimer.S > URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos/trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/systime… > ============================================================================== > --- trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/systimer.S [iso-8859-1] (original) > +++ trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/systimer.S [iso-8859-1] Tue Oct 27 02:03:41 2009 > @@ -17,11 +17,386 @@ > _HalpLastPerfCounterHigh: .long 0 > _HalpPerfCounterLow: .long 0 > _HalpPerfCounterHigh: .long 0 > +_HalpSystemHardwareLock: .long 0 > +_HalpSystemHardwareFlags: .long 0 > > _UnhandledMsg: > .asciz "\n\x7\x7!!! Unhandled or Unexpected Code at line: %lx!!!\n" > > /* FUNCTIONS *****************************************************************/ > + > +.global _HalpReleaseCmosSpinLock@0 > +.func HalpReleaseCmosSpinLock@0 > +_HalpReleaseCmosSpinLock@0: > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > + /* Save clobbered register */ > + push eax > + > + /* Push saved EFLAGS */ > + push _HalpSystemHardwareFlags > + > + /* Release the lock */ > + lea eax, _HalpSystemHardwareLock > + RELEASE_SPINLOCK(eax) > + > + /* Restore EFLAGS */ > + popf > + > + /* Return */ > + pop eax > + ret > +#else > + /* Restore EFLAGS and return */ > + push _HalpSystemHardwareFlags > + popf > + ret > +#endif > +.endfunc > + > +.global _HalpAcquireSystemHardwareSpinLock@0 > +.func HalpAcquireSystemHardwareSpinLock@0 > +_HalpAcquireSystemHardwareSpinLock@0: > + > +#ifdef CONFIG_SMP > + /* Save clobbered register */ > + push eax > + > +HardwareLock: > + /* Save EFLAGS and disable interrupts */ > + pushf > + cli > + > + /* This is the CMOS lock, acquire it */ > + lea eax, _HalpSystemHardwareLock > + ACQUIRE_SPINLOCK(eax, CmosSpin) > + > + /* We have it, return the flags */ > + pop _HalpSystemHardwareFlags > + pop eax > + ret > + > +CmosSpin: > + > + /* Restore EFLAGS */ > + pushf _HalpSystemHardwareLock > + popf > + > + /* Spin */ > + SPIN_ON_LOCK(eax, HardwareLock) > + > +#else > + /* Save EFLAGS, disable interrupts and return */ > + pushf > + cli > + pop _HalpSystemHardwareFlags > + ret > +#endif > +.endfunc > + > +.global _HalpCalibrateStallExecution@0 > +.func HalpCalibrateStallExecution@0 > +_HalpCalibrateStallExecution@0: > + > + /* Setup the stack frame */ > + push ebp > + mov ebp, esp > + sub esp, 12 > + > + /* Save EFLAGS and kill interrupts */ > + pushf > + cli > + > + /* Get the current interrupt mask on the PICs */ > + xor eax, eax > + in al, 0xA1 > + shl eax, 8 > + in al, 0x21 > + > + /* Save it */ > + push eax > + > + /* Now mask everything except the RTC and PIC 2 chain-interrupt */ > + mov eax, ~((1 << 2) | (1 << 8)) > + > + /* Program the PICs */ > + out 0x21, al > + shr eax, 8 > + out 0xA1, al > + > + /* Now get the IDT */ > + sidt [ebp-8] > + mov ecx, [ebp-6] > + > + /* Get the IDT entry for the RTC */ > + mov eax, 0x38 > + shl eax, 3 > + add ecx, eax > + > + /* Save the original RTC ISR */ > + push [ecx] > + push [ecx+4] > + push ecx > + > + /* Now load our new handler */ > + mov eax, offset OnlyOnePersonCanWriteHalCode > + mov [ecx], ax > + mov word ptr [ecx+2], KGDT_R0_CODE > + mov word ptr [ecx+4], 0x8E00 > + shr eax, 16 > + mov [ecx+6], ax > + > + /* Reset our counter */ > + mov dword ptr [ebp-12], 0 > + > + /* Acquire CMOS lock */ > + call _HalpAcquireSystemHardwareSpinLock@0 > + > + /* Now initialize register A on the CMOS */ > + mov ax, (0x2D << 8) | 0xA > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + mov al, ah > + out 0x71, al > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Read register B */ > + mov ax, 0xB > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + in al, 0x71 > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Don't touch the LastKnownGoodConfig hack */ > + and al, 1 > + mov ah, al > + > + /* Enable the interrupt */ > + or ah, 0x42 > + > + /* Now write the register B */ > + mov al, 0xB > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + mov al, ah > + out 0x71, al > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Read register C */ > + mov al, 0xC > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + in al, 0x71 > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Read register D */ > + mov al, 0xD > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + in al, 0x71 > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Release CMOS lock */ > + mov dword ptr [ebp-12], 0 > + call _HalpReleaseCmosSpinLock@0 > + > + /* Initialize looper */ > + xor eax, eax > + > + /* Align to 16 bytes */ > + .align 16 > + > + /* Enable interrupts! */ > + sti > + jmp Looper > + > + /* Align to 16 bytes */ > + .align 16 > + > + /* Subtract one count */ > +Looper: > + sub eax, 1 > + jnz Looper > + > + /* ASSERT: If we got here, then the RTC never fired */ > + call _DbgBreakPoint@0 > + jmp Looper > + > +OnlyOnePersonCanWriteHalCode: > + /*********************** THIS IS THE RTC HANDLER **************************/ > + > + /* Increment the interrupt count and check if this is the first one */ > + inc dword ptr [ebp-12] > + cmp dword ptr [ebp-12], 1 > + jnz ComputeStall > + > + /* > + * It is the first one -- we'll ignore it, since it fires randomly! > + * Get rid of the old return address and push the new one in (our looper) > + */ > + pop eax > + push offset Looper > + > + /* Acquire CMOS lock */ > + call _HalpAcquireSystemHardwareSpinLock@0 > + > + /* Now initialize register A on the CMOS */ > + mov ax, (0x2D << 8) | 0xA > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + mov al, ah > + out 0x71, al > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Read register B */ > + mov ax, 0xB > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + in al, 0x71 > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Don't touch the LastKnownGoodConfig hack */ > + and al, 1 > + mov ah, al > + > + /* Enable the interrupt */ > + or ah, 0x42 > + > + /* Now write the register B */ > + mov al, 0xB > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + mov al, ah > + out 0x71, al > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Read register C */ > + mov al, 0xC > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + in al, 0x71 > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Read register D */ > + mov al, 0xD > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + in al, 0x71 > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Release CMOS lock */ > + call _HalpReleaseCmosSpinLock@0 > + > + /* Dismiss the interrupt */ > + mov al, 0x20 > + out 0xA0, al > + mov al, 0x62 > + out 0x20, al > + > + /* Reset the counter and return back to the looper */ > + xor eax, eax > + iretd > + > + /******************* THIS IS THE 2ND RTC HANDLER **************************/ > +ComputeStall: > + > + /* Do the calculation */ > + neg eax > + xor edx, edx > + mov ecx, 125000 /* RTC fires every 125 ms */ > + div ecx > + > + /* Is the remainder 0? */ > + cmp edx, 0 > + jz FoundFactor > + > + /* Otherwise fix-up the loop count */ > + inc eax > + > +FoundFactor: > + /* Save the stall scale factor */ > + mov fs:[KPCR_STALL_SCALE_FACTOR], eax > + > + /* Prepare for interrupt return */ > + pop eax > + push offset AndItsNotYou > + mov eax, 0x13 > + > + /* Acquire CMOS lock */ > + call _HalpAcquireSystemHardwareSpinLock@0 > + > + /* Now initialize register A on the CMOS */ > + mov ax, (0x2D << 8) | 0xA > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + mov al, ah > + out 0x71, al > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Read register B */ > + mov ax, 0xB > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + in al, 0x71 > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Don't touch the LastKnownGoodConfig hack */ > + and al, 1 > + mov ah, al > + > + /* Disable the interrupt */ > + or ah, 0x2 > + > + /* Now write the register B */ > + mov al, 0xB > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + mov al, ah > + out 0x71, al > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Read register C */ > + mov al, 0xC > + out 0x70, al > + jmp $+2 > + in al, 0x71 > + jmp $+2 > + > + /* Release CMOS lock */ > + call _HalpReleaseCmosSpinLock@0 > + > + /* Dismiss the interrupt */ > + mov al, 0x20 > + out 0xA0, al > + mov al, 0x62 > + out 0x20, al > + > + /* Disable interrupts on return */ > + and word ptr [esp+8], ~EFLAGS_INTERRUPT_MASK > + iretd > + > + /************************* WE ARE BACK FROM RTC ***************************/ > +AndItsNotYou: > + > + /* Restore the IDT */ > + pop ecx > + pop [ecx+4] > + pop [ecx] > + > + /* Restore the mask */ > + pop eax > + out 0x21, al > + shr eax, 8 > + out 0xA1, al > + > + /* Restore EFLAGS */ > + popf > + > + /* Restore stack and return */ > + mov esp, ebp > + pop ebp > + ret > +.endfunc > > .globl _KeStallExecutionProcessor@4 > .func KeStallExecutionProcessor@4 > @@ -53,34 +428,6 @@ > /* Return */ > ret 4 > .endfunc > - > - > -.globl _HalpQuery8254Counter@0 > -.func HalpQuery8254Counter@0 > -_HalpQuery8254Counter@0: > - > - /* Save EFLAGS and disable interrupts */ > - pushfd > - cli > - > - /* Set timer data */ > - mov al, 0 > - out 0x43, al > - jmp $+2 > - > - /* Read current timer */ > - in al, 0x40 > - jmp $+2 > - movzx ecx, al > - in al, 0x40 > - mov ch, al > - > - /* Return it and restore interrupt state */ > - mov eax, ecx > - popfd > - ret > -.endfunc > - > > .global _KeQueryPerformanceCounter@4 > .func KeQueryPerformanceCounter@4 > > Modified: trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/timer.c > URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos/trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/timer.c… > ============================================================================== > --- trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/timer.c [iso-8859-1] (original) > +++ trunk/reactos/hal/halx86/generic/timer.c [iso-8859-1] Tue Oct 27 02:03:41 2009 > @@ -13,11 +13,6 @@ > #include <debug.h> > > /* GLOBALS *******************************************************************/ > - > -/* time to wait */ > -#define MICROSECOND_TO_WAIT 1000 > -/* the tick count for 1 ms is 1193.182 (1193182 Hz) round it up */ > -#define TICKCOUNT_TO_WAIT 1194 > > BOOLEAN HalpClockSetMSRate; > ULONG HalpCurrentTimeIncrement; > @@ -135,161 +130,4 @@ > return HalpRolloverTable[Increment - 1].HighPart; > } > > -ULONG > -WaitFor8254Wraparound(VOID) > -{ > - ULONG StartTicks; > - ULONG PrevTicks; > - LONG Delta; > - > - StartTicks = HalpQuery8254Counter(); > - > - do > - { > - PrevTicks = StartTicks; > - StartTicks = HalpQuery8254Counter(); > - Delta = StartTicks - PrevTicks; > - > - /* > - * This limit for delta seems arbitrary, but it isn't, it's > - * slightly above the level of error a buggy Mercury/Neptune > - * chipset timer can cause. > - */ > - > - } > - while (Delta < 300); > - > - return StartTicks; > -} > - > -VOID > -NTAPI > -HalpCalibrateStallExecution(VOID) > -{ > - ULONG CalibrationBit; > - ULONG EndTicks; > - ULONG StartTicks; > - ULONG OverheadTicks; > - PKIPCR Pcr; > - > - Pcr = (PKIPCR)KeGetPcr(); > - > - /* Measure the delay for the minimum call overhead in ticks */ > - Pcr->StallScaleFactor = 1; > - StartTicks = WaitFor8254Wraparound(); > - KeStallExecutionProcessor(1); > - EndTicks = HalpQuery8254Counter(); > - OverheadTicks = (StartTicks - EndTicks); > - > - do > - { > - /* Increase the StallScaleFactor */ > - Pcr->StallScaleFactor = Pcr->StallScaleFactor * 2; > - > - if (Pcr->StallScaleFactor == 0) > - { > - /* Nothing found */ > - break; > - } > - > - /* Get the start ticks */ > - StartTicks = WaitFor8254Wraparound(); > - > - /* Wait for a defined time */ > - KeStallExecutionProcessor(MICROSECOND_TO_WAIT); > - > - /* Get the end ticks */ > - EndTicks = HalpQuery8254Counter(); > - > - DPRINT("Pcr->StallScaleFactor: %d\n", Pcr->StallScaleFactor); > - DPRINT("Time1 : StartTicks %i - EndTicks %i = %i\n", > - StartTicks, EndTicks, StartTicks - EndTicks); > - } while ((StartTicks - EndTicks) <= (TICKCOUNT_TO_WAIT + OverheadTicks)); > - > - /* A StallScaleFactor lesser than INITIAL_STALL_COUNT makes no sense */ > - if (Pcr->StallScaleFactor >= (INITIAL_STALL_COUNT * 2)) > - { > - /* Adjust the StallScaleFactor */ > - Pcr->StallScaleFactor = Pcr->StallScaleFactor / 2; > - > - /* Setup the CalibrationBit */ > - CalibrationBit = Pcr->StallScaleFactor; > - > - for (;;) > - { > - /* Lower the CalibrationBit */ > - CalibrationBit = CalibrationBit / 2; > - if (CalibrationBit == 0) > - { > - break; > - } > - > - /* Add the CalibrationBit */ > - Pcr->StallScaleFactor = Pcr->StallScaleFactor + CalibrationBit; > - > - /* Get the start ticks */ > - StartTicks = WaitFor8254Wraparound(); > - > - /* Wait for a defined time */ > - KeStallExecutionProcessor(MICROSECOND_TO_WAIT); > - > - /* Get the end ticks */ > - EndTicks = HalpQuery8254Counter(); > - > - DPRINT("Pcr->StallScaleFactor: %d\n", Pcr->StallScaleFactor); > - DPRINT("Time2 : StartTicks %i - EndTicks %i = %i\n", > - StartTicks, EndTicks, StartTicks - EndTicks); > - > - if ((StartTicks-EndTicks) > (TICKCOUNT_TO_WAIT+OverheadTicks)) > - { > - /* Too big so subtract the CalibrationBit */ > - Pcr->StallScaleFactor = Pcr->StallScaleFactor - CalibrationBit; > - } > - } > - DPRINT("New StallScaleFactor: %d\n", Pcr->StallScaleFactor); > - } > - else > - { > - /* Set StallScaleFactor to the default */ > - Pcr->StallScaleFactor = INITIAL_STALL_COUNT; > - } > - > -#if 0 > - /* For debugging */ > - ULONG i; > - > - DPRINT1("About to start delay loop test\n"); > - DPRINT1("Waiting for a minute..."); > - for (i = 0; i < (60*1000*20); i++) > - { > - KeStallExecutionProcessor(50); > - } > - DPRINT1("finished\n"); > - > - > - DPRINT1("About to start delay loop test\n"); > - DPRINT1("Waiting for a minute..."); > - for (i = 0; i < (60*1000); i++) > - { > - KeStallExecutionProcessor(1000); > - } > - DPRINT1("finished\n"); > - > - > - DPRINT1("About to start delay loop test\n"); > - DPRINT1("Waiting for a minute..."); > - for (i = 0; i < (60*1000*1000); i++) > - { > - KeStallExecutionProcessor(1); > - } > - DPRINT1("finished\n"); > - > - DPRINT1("About to start delay loop test\n"); > - DPRINT1("Waiting for a minute..."); > - KeStallExecutionProcessor(60*1000000); > - DPRINT1("finished\n"); > -#endif > -} > - > - > /* EOF */ > > _________________________________________________________________ Nuovo Windows 7: trova il PC più adatto alle tue esigenze. Scopri di più. http://windows.microsoft.com/shop

7 12

27 Oct '09

I remember that atapi driver had the same problem (fixed in r26470). Perhaps uniata can be changed, too.

1 0

Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [janderwald] 43783: - Revert 43774
by Aleksey Bragin 26 Oct '09

26 Oct '09

why? On Oct 26, 2009, at 10:32 PM, janderwald(a)svn.reactos.org wrote: > Author: janderwald > Date: Mon Oct 26 20:32:25 2009 > New Revision: 43783 > > URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=43783&view=rev > Log: > - Revert 43774 > > Removed: > trunk/reactos/dll/directx/dsound_new/ > >

1 0

Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [jimtabor] 43782: - Fix wine class test with a sync with wine edit.c.
by Ged Murphy 26 Oct '09

26 Oct '09

This looks weird, anyone know what's going on? -----Original Message----- From: ros-diffs-bounces(a)reactos.org [mailto:ros-diffs-bounces@reactos.org] On Behalf Of jimtabor(a)svn.reactos.org Sent: 26 October 2009 18:27 To: ros-diffs(a)reactos.org Subject: [ros-diffs] [jimtabor] 43782: - Fix wine class test with a sync with wine edit.c. Author: jimtabor Date: Mon Oct 26 19:26:48 2009 New Revision: 43782 URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=43782&view=rev Log: - Fix wine class test with a sync with wine edit.c. Modified: trunk/reactos/dll/win32/user32/controls/edit.c Modified: trunk/reactos/dll/win32/user32/controls/edit.c URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos/trunk/reactos/dll/win32/user32/controls/… ============================================================================== --- trunk/reactos/dll/win32/user32/controls/edit.c [iso-8859-1] (original) +++ trunk/reactos/dll/win32/user32/controls/edit.c [iso-8859-1] Mon Oct 26 19:26:48 2009 @@ -5533,7 +5533,11 @@ CS_DBLCLKS | CS_PARENTDC, /* style */ EditWndProcA, /* procA */ EditWndProcW, /* procW */ +#ifdef _WIN64 sizeof(EDITSTATE *), /* extra */ +#else + sizeof(EDITSTATE *) + sizeof(WORD), /* extra */ +#endif IDC_IBEAM, /* cursor */ 0 /* brush */ };

2 1

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Ros-dev October 2009