Ros-dev

ros-dev@reactos.org

5791 discussions

Re: [ros-cvs] CVS Update: reactos
by James Tabor 31 Oct '04

31 Oct '04

Alex! Hi! ion(a)cvs.reactos.com wrote: > CVSROOT: /CVS/ReactOS > Module name: reactos > Repository: reactos/ntoskrnl/io/ > Changes by: ion(a)mok.osexperts.com 04/10/31 14:21:41 > > Modified files: > reactos/include/ddk/: iofuncs.h iotypes.h > reactos/ntoskrnl/io/: cleanup.c irp.c > > Log message: > Use proper IRP structure I'm get'en this, i386-mingw32-gcc -I./include -Wall -Werror -D_DISABLE_TIDENTS -D__3GB__ -D__NTOSKRNL__ -I. -D_SEH_NO_NATIVE_NLG -I../include -I../w32api/include -pipe -march=i486 -D_M_IX86 -c io/cleanup.c -o io/cleanup.o io/cleanup.c: In function `IoSecondStageCompletion': io/cleanup.c:195: error: `by' undeclared (first use in this function) io/cleanup.c:195: error: (Each undeclared identifier is reported only once io/cleanup.c:195: error: for each function it appears in.) io/cleanup.c:195: error: parse error before "DeviceObject" make: *** [io/cleanup.o] Error 1 Not sure what time this poped up, James

2 1

Guarded mutex
by Aliberti Emanuele 31 Oct '04

31 Oct '04

I found a note, in Kernel Mustard's (Steve Dispensa) blog, about guarded mutexes, which is a completely new synchronization object to me. typedef struct _KGUARDED_MUTEX ULONG Count; PKTHREAD Owner; ULONG Contention; KGATE Gate; WORD KernelApcDisable; WORD SpecialApcDisable; ULONG CombinedApcDisable; } KGUARDED_MUTEX, *PKGUARDED_MUTEX; What are they? KM says they are less expensive than FAST_MUTEXes. By the way, what is a KGATE? Emanuele

3 2

RE: [ros-cvs] CVS Update: reactos
by Hartmut Birr 31 Oct '04

31 Oct '04

Hi, this changes prevents from using debug print's in the very early boot phase, because the processor runs at HIGH_LEVEL and asserts in KfAcquireSpinLock. - Hartmut > -----Original Message----- > From: ros-cvs-bounces(a)reactos.com > [mailto:ros-cvs-bounces@reactos.com] On Behalf Of > navaraf(a)cvs.reactos.com > Sent: Saturday, October 30, 2004 6:30 AM > To: ros-cvs(a)reactos.com > Subject: [ros-cvs] CVS Update: reactos > > > CVSROOT: /CVS/ReactOS > Module name: reactos > Repository: reactos/hal/halx86/ > Changes by: navaraf(a)mok.osexperts.com 04/10/30 06:30:05 > > Modified files: > reactos/hal/halx86/: display.c > > Log message: > - Use KfAcquireSpinLock/KfReleaseSpinLock instead of > KiAcquireSpinLock/KiReleaseSpinLock. > > _______________________________________________ > Ros-cvs mailing list > Ros-cvs(a)reactos.com > http://reactos.com/mailman/listinfo/ros-cvs >

2 3

list administrator
by Hartmut Birr 30 Oct '04

30 Oct '04

Hi, who is is the administrator of our ros-dev mailing list? I would like to ask a question outside of the list. - Hartmut

2 1

Explorer make failure
by Enrico Bartky 30 Oct '04

30 Oct '04

Hello, if I try to compile explorer the following error occurs: explorer.cpp: In function `int wWinMain(HINSTANCE__*, HINSTANCE__*, TCHAR*, int)': explorer.cpp:714: error: call of overloaded `wcsstr(TCHAR*&, const wchar_t[9])' is ambiguous c:/mingw/bin/../lib/gcc/mingw32/3.4.1/../../../../include/string.h:119: note: candidates are: wchar_t* wcsstr(const wchar_t*, const wchar_t*) c:/mingw/bin/../lib/gcc/mingw32/3.4.1/../../../../include/c++/3.4.1/cwchar:227: note: wchar_t* std::wcsstr(wchar_t*, wchar_t*) ... mingw32-make: *** [explorer.o] Error 1 Is there a problem with my w32api version? EnricoB

2 1

ros on a multiprocessor system
by Hartmut Birr 30 Oct '04

30 Oct '04

Hi, currently I'm trying to get ros to work on a multiprocessor system. There exist many problems. The major problem is a dead lock, which occurs if different processors try to acquire the DispatcherDatabaseLock and the PiThreadLock. Sometimes, it seems, the sequence to acquire the two locks is different. It would be nice, if someone can look for this problem. - Hartmut

2 2

FreeLdr: FsOpenVolume
by Filip Navara 30 Oct '04

30 Oct '04

Hi, since there have been several reports of the ROS CDs failing to boot with the "Invalid partition table magic" message I though if the line 85 in freeldr/fs/fs.c can be the cause. If the CD-ROM drive would get assigned the 0x80 BIOS number (can this everr happen?) then we would end up reading partition table from it and crash later. Any thoughts? Regards, Filip Index: freeldr/fs/fs.c =================================================================== RCS file: /CVS/ReactOS/freeldr/freeldr/fs/fs.c,v retrieving revision 1.14 diff -u -r1.14 fs.c --- freeldr/fs/fs.c 25 May 2004 21:31:27 -0000 1.14 +++ freeldr/fs/fs.c 30 Oct 2004 15:01:41 -0000 @@ -82,7 +82,7 @@ } // Check for ISO9660 file system type - if (DriveNumber > 0x80 && FsRecIsIso9660(DriveNumber)) + if (DriveNumber >= 0x80 && FsRecIsIso9660(DriveNumber)) { DbgPrint((DPRINT_FILESYSTEM, "Drive is a cdrom drive. Assuming ISO-9660 file system.\n"));

2 1

Msi.dll
by James Tabor 30 Oct '04

30 Oct '04

Hi, Is it okay to commit a broken port of wine Msi.dll source to our cvs? 8^P I'm working on avdpack.dll with msiexec.exe. I have bison working with building the port, that was not the problem. It's this; i386-mingw32-gcc -Wl,--base-file,base.tmp \ -Wl,--entry,_DllMain@12 \ -mdll -Wl,--image-base,0x777c0000 \ -o junk.tmp \ version.coff action.o create.o distinct.o handle.o insert.o msi.o msiquery.o order.o package.o record.o regsvr.o select.o string.o suminfo.o table.o tokenize.o update.o where.o sql.tab.o cond.tab.o ../../dk/w32/lib/shell32.a ../../dk/w32/lib/cabinet.a ../../dk/w32/lib/oleaut32.a ../../dk/w32/lib/ole32.a ../../dk/w32/lib/version.a ../../dk/w32/lib/user32.a ../../dk/w32/lib/advapi32.a ../../dk/w32/lib/kernel32.a ../../dk/w32/lib/libwine.a ../../dk/w32/lib/wine_uuid.a ../../dk/w32/lib/ntdll.a Warning: resolving _MsiGetFileVersionW by linking to _MsiGetFileVersionW@20 Use --enable-stdcall-fixup to disable these warnings Use --disable-stdcall-fixup to disable these fixups action.o(.text+0x879e):action.c: undefined reference to `LoadTypeLib@8' action.o(.text+0x8830):action.c: undefined reference to `RegisterTypeLib@12' action.o(.text+0x88c6):action.c: undefined reference to `ITypeLib_Release' suminfo.o(.text+0x3e):suminfo.c: undefined reference to `IPropertyStorage_Release' suminfo.o(.text+0x324):suminfo.c: undefined reference to `IPropertySetStorage_Open' suminfo.o(.text+0x396):suminfo.c: undefined reference to `IPropertyStorage_AddRef' suminfo.o(.text+0x3e9):suminfo.c: undefined reference to `IPropertyStorage_Release' suminfo.o(.text+0x3fd):suminfo.c: undefined reference to `IPropertySetStorage_Release' suminfo.o(.text+0x569):suminfo.c: undefined reference to `IPropertyStorage_ReadMultiple' make: *** [msi.nostrip.dll] Error 1 Thanks, James

3 4

Re: [ros-cvs] CVS Update: reactos
by Aliberti Emanuele 29 Oct '04

29 Oct '04

chorns(a)cvs.reactos.com wrote: >CVSROOT: /CVS/ReactOS >Module name: reactos >Repository: reactos/tools/ >Changes by: chorns(a)mok.osexperts.com 04/10/28 12:02:01 > >Log message: > 2004-10-28 Casper S. Hornstrup <chorns(a)users.sourceforge.net> > > * drivers/net/tcpip/tests/setup.c: Include windows.h. > * lib/gdiplus/tests/setup.c: Ditto. > * lib/kernel32/tests/setup.c: Ditto. > * lib/ws2_32/tests/setup.c: Ditto. > * subsys/win32k/tests/setup.c: Ditto. > * ntoskrnl/tests/setup.c: Ditto. > * ntoskrnl/include/ntoskrnl.h: Include test.h. > * ntoskrnl/mm/virtual.c (NtLockVirtualMemoryInternal): New function. > (NtLockVirtualMemory): Use NtLockVirtualMemoryInternal. > > Should we define a sort of "best practice" in inserting a little "p" after the subsystem prefix and before the proper function's o structure's name, to mark the *p*rivate symbols, or use the "Internal" suffix? 1) NtpLockVirtualMemory (MmpLockVirtualMemory) 2) NtLockVirtualMemoryInternal IMHO, not only an aesthetics problem. Option (1) means that any symbol in ntoskrnl/include have a "p" or "P" in their names. > * ntoskrnl/tests/Makefile (TARGET_CFLAGS): Add -I../include. > * ntoskrnl/tests/stubs.tst: Remove stubs for functions in libgcc. > * regtests/shared/regtests.h: Make independent of windows.h. > * tools/helper.mk (run): Link with libgcc. > * tools/regtests.c (EXESTUB): Include windows.h. > * ntoskrnl/include/internal/test.h: New file. > * ntoskrnl/tests/tests/VirtualMemory.c: Ditto. > > > Emanuele

5 6

FPU saving + V86 problem - not sure how to solve it
by Anich Gregor 28 Oct '04

28 Oct '04

Hi! I have a problem with my FPU state saving changes and v86 mode. In ke/i386/v86m_sup.S are the functions which enter/leave v86 mode... Ki386RetToV86Mode enters v86 mode. It changes CurrentThread->InitialStack and TSS->Esp0 to %esp to make the exception handler run below the used stack and not overwrite it. The exception handler (KeV86GPF) uses a PKV86M_TRAP_FRAME, which contains a KTRAP_FRAME at the beginning and some additional info behind. This additional info is the data on the stack of Ki386RetToV86Mode, since it sets TSS->Esp0 to %esp, the CPU will push the trap-frame below when an exception is raised and the additional info will be after the trap-frame. The problem is that for reserving a FX_SAVE_AREA at the top of the kernel-stack (without changing the KTHREAD->InitialStack value) i changed tskswitch.S to set TSS->Esp0 to NewThread->InitialStack - sizeof(FX_SAVE_AREA), not NewThread->InitialStack. Now if it's switching away and back to a v86 task TSS->Esp0 will be sizeof(FX_SAVE_AREA) less than before, and the V86 exception handler will be unable to find the additional info from Ki386RetToV86Mode's original stack. I am not sure how to solve it. I think it could be done by 1) Adding another variable somewhere (or maybe there is already one somewhere which is meant to be used for this) for the exception-handler stack of the thread, which can then be used by tskswitch.S to update TSS->Esp0. 2) only substract sizeof(FX_SAVE_AREA) from InitalStack for setting up TSS->Esp0 in tskswitch.S if the VM bit of the EFLAGS is not set. Problem is that the CPU unsets the VM bit if using protected-mode exception handlers for v86 tasks, so we would need to get a copy (or pointer to) the eflags pushed by the CPU for the IRQ handler into tskswitch.S (change PsDispatchThread/PsDispatchThreadNoLock prototypes) All this assumes that the FPU would never be used in V86 mode (and I hope that this assumption is correct ;-)) Any suggestions are welcome. - blight

2 1

Jump to page:

2026

2025

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

Ros-dev