On Wed, Jun 24, 2015 at 9:26 AM, <cfinck(a)svn.reactos.org> wrote:
> cbSize
Well, you may at least want to validate that your dwOffsets are within
cbSize?
Best regards,
Alex Ionescu
On 2015-06-29 20:26, ekohl(a)svn.reactos.org wrote:
> Modified: trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/config/cmmapvw.c
> URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos/trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/config/cmmapvw.c?…
> ==============================================================================
> --- trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/config/cmmapvw.c [iso-8859-1] (original)
> +++ trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/config/cmmapvw.c [iso-8859-1] Mon Jun 29 18:26:56 2015
> @@ -29,3 +29,54 @@
> Hive->PinnedViews = 0;
> Hive->UseCount = 0;
> }
> +
> +VOID
> +NTAPI
> +CmpDestroyHiveViewList(IN PCMHIVE Hive)
> +{
> + PCM_VIEW_OF_FILE CmView;
> + PLIST_ENTRY EntryList;
> +
> + /* Do NOT destroy the views of read-only hives */
> + ASSERT(Hive->Hive.ReadOnly == FALSE);
> +
> + /* Free all the views inside the Pinned View List */
> + EntryList = RemoveHeadList(&Hive->PinViewListHead);
> + while (EntryList != &Hive->PinViewListHead)
In case you haven't found it yourself yet maybe I can speed things up in
identifying the test failures here:
I made RemoveHeadList on an empty list cause a security check failure
a while back because when done unintentionally it can indicate a bug in
the code, while OTOH it's super easy to avoid.
So I'm guessing this is probably the cause, and should use a
while (!IsListEmpty()) RemoveHeadList(); or similar pattern.
If you have strong feelings against this check (which MS's headers
don't do), let me know.
> + {
> + CmView = CONTAINING_RECORD(EntryList, CM_VIEW_OF_FILE, PinViewList);
> +
> + /* FIXME: Unmap the view if it is mapped */
> +
> + ExFreePool(CmView);
> +
> + Hive->PinnedViews--;
> +
> + EntryList = RemoveHeadList(&Hive->PinViewListHead);
> + }
> +
> + /* The Pinned View List should be empty */
> + ASSERT(IsListEmpty(&Hive->PinViewListHead) == TRUE);
> + ASSERT(Hive->PinnedViews == 0);
> +
> + /* Now, free all the views inside the LRU View List */
> + EntryList = RemoveHeadList(&Hive->LRUViewListHead);
> + while (EntryList != &Hive->LRUViewListHead)
> + {
> + CmView = CONTAINING_RECORD(EntryList, CM_VIEW_OF_FILE, LRUViewList);
> +
> + /* FIXME: Unmap the view if it is mapped */
> +
> + ExFreePool(CmView);
> +
> + Hive->MappedViews--;
> +
> + EntryList = RemoveHeadList(&Hive->LRUViewListHead);
> + }
Hello,
Let me invite you to the monthly status meeting taking place 25th of
June, 19:00 UTC, as always.
IRC service will only be started shortly before the meeting. Your
participation passwords and server address will be emailed to you
shortly before the meeting starts, and they are going to be different
once again as they are not stored in any database. Hopefully it's not
much of inconvenience.
Please send agenda proposals to me before the meeting.
One point for agenda would be discussion of our upcoming Hackfest in
Aachen, which is going to be awesome (the Hackfest, and hopefully the
discussion too ;))
Regards,
Aleksey Bragin
Join us for the very first ReactOS Hackfest from Friday, 7th August to
Wednesday, 13th August 2015, in the German city of Aachen. Discover
Germany's most-Western city in the direct neighborhood of Belgium and
the Netherlands. Within the historical city center, Aachen offers a
scientific environment and a high density of pubs. Let's catch this
atmosphere to code the week away and achieve great results as a team!
===> It is now time to plan your trip! <===
Flights and Accommodation won't get cheaper.
You find all details on this Wiki page:
https://reactos.org/wiki/ReactOS_Hackfest_2015
Don't forget to add your ideas and travelling details to this page:
https://reactos.org/wiki/ReactOS_Hackfest_2015/Lists
If you have any further questions, just drop me a line by E-Mail or call
me on the mobile phone number I sent to ros-priv.
Looking forward to meet you!
With best regards,
Colin Finck
Hi all,
After some attempts yesterday and today, the VMware Testbots are finally
fixed. Due to a misconfiguration, they were unfortunately testing the
same revision 65663 all the time.
I'm going to delete the duplicate testings for r65663 once I have some
time. Unless somebody is interested in the most detailed information
about randomly failing Wine tests ;)
Cheers,
Colin
Am 14.06.2015 um 18:00 schrieb pschweitzer(a)svn.reactos.org:
> Author: pschweitzer
> Date: Sun Jun 14 16:00:27 2015
> New Revision: 68137
>
>
> - Proc = (1ULL << Processor) >> 0x20;
> + Proc = (1ULL << Processor) >> MAXIMUM_PROCESSORS;
This is effectively the same as "Proc = (Processor ==
MAXIMUM_PROCESSORS);" which is always 0.
Timo