November 2016 - Wine-devel - list.winehq.org

Re: msvcirt: Avoid "array subscript above array bounds" warnings in test_ostrstream and test_strstreambuf.
by Piotr Caban 04 Nov '16

04 Nov '16

Hi, sorry for long reply time. On 10/30/16 14:55, Gerald Pfeifer wrote: > - ok(ssb1.base.ebuf == buffer + 0x7fffffff || ssb1.base.ebuf == (char*)-1, > + ok((size_t)ssb1.base.ebuf == (size_t)buffer + 0x7fffffff || ssb1.base.ebuf == (char*)-1, Is casting buffer to char* enough to get away with the warning? I think I would prefer it to be done this way if it works. I'm also not sure if this warning is useful. I don't see anything wrong in computing the pointer as long as it's not accessed. I guess it can't be disabled without also disabling some useful warnings? Thanks, Piotr

1 0

Re: [PATCH v2 2/7] winebus.sys: Implement removing IOHID devices
by Sebastian Lackner 04 Nov '16

04 Nov '16

2016-11-04 13:45 GMT+01:00 Aric Stewart <aric(a)codeweavers.com>: > > v2: Suggestions from Ken Thomases > Signed-off-by: Aric Stewart <aric(a)codeweavers.com> > --- > dlls/winebus.sys/bus_iohid.c | 18 +++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 17 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > I haven't reviewed the whole series yet, but the result of subtracting two ULONG_PTRs might not fit in an int return value.

1 0

Re: [v2 PATCH] vbscript: Implement StrComp()
by Marvin 04 Nov '16

04 Nov '16

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=26449 Your paranoid android. === wxppro (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2003std (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === wvistau64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2008s64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7u (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7pro64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w8 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w864 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w1064 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === wvistau64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2008s64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7pro64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w864 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w1064 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash

1 0

Re: [PATCH] vbscript: Implement StrComp()
by Dmitry Timoshkov 04 Nov '16

04 Nov '16

Nikolay Sivov <nsivov(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: > + TRACE("(%s %s ...)\n", debugstr_variant(args), debugstr_variant(args+1)); > + > + assert(args_cnt == 2 || args_cnt == 3); > + > + if(V_VT(args) != VT_BSTR || V_VT(args+1) != VT_BSTR) { > + FIXME("args[0] = %s, args[1] = %s\n", debugstr_variant(args), debugstr_variant(args+1)); > + return E_NOTIMPL; > + } > + > + if (args_cnt == 3) { > + hres = to_int(args+2, &mode); > + if(FAILED(hres)) > + return hres; > + > + if (mode != 0 && mode != 1) { > + FIXME("unknown compare mode = %d\n", mode); > + return E_FAIL; > + } > + } > + else > + mode = 0; > + > + left = V_BSTR(args); > + right = V_BSTR(args+1); Is it possible to consistently use single way of accessing the args array, for instance the indexed args[i] form? -- Dmitry.

2 2

Re: [PATCH] vbscript: Implement StrComp()
by Jacek Caban 04 Nov '16

04 Nov '16

Hi Nikolay, The patch looks mostly good. On 04.11.2016 07:34, Nikolay Sivov wrote: > Signed-off-by: Nikolay Sivov <nsivov(a)codeweavers.com> > --- > dlls/vbscript/global.c | 43 ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++--- > dlls/vbscript/tests/api.vbs | 15 +++++++++++++++ > 2 files changed, 55 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/vbscript/global.c b/dlls/vbscript/global.c > index 129d6ce..a872838 100644 > --- a/dlls/vbscript/global.c > +++ b/dlls/vbscript/global.c > @@ -1027,10 +1027,47 @@ static HRESULT Global_MidB(vbdisp_t *This, VARIANT *arg, unsigned args_cnt, VARI > return E_NOTIMPL; > } > > -static HRESULT Global_StrComp(vbdisp_t *This, VARIANT *arg, unsigned args_cnt, VARIANT *res) > +static HRESULT Global_StrComp(vbdisp_t *This, VARIANT *args, unsigned args_cnt, VARIANT *res) > { > - FIXME("\n"); > - return E_NOTIMPL; > + BSTR left, right; > + int mode, ret; > + HRESULT hres; > + > + TRACE("(%s %s ...)\n", debugstr_variant(args), debugstr_variant(args+1)); > + > + assert(args_cnt == 2 || args_cnt == 3); > + > + if(V_VT(args) != VT_BSTR || V_VT(args+1) != VT_BSTR) { > + FIXME("args[0] = %s, args[1] = %s\n", debugstr_variant(args), debugstr_variant(args+1)); > + return E_NOTIMPL; > + } > + > + if (args_cnt == 3) { > + hres = to_int(args+2, &mode); A test where mode arg is of other type would be nice. Something like "1" (passed as a string). > + if(FAILED(hres)) > + return hres; > + > + if (mode != 0 && mode != 1) { > + FIXME("unknown compare mode = %d\n", mode); > + return E_FAIL; > + } > + } > + else > + mode = 0; > + > + left = V_BSTR(args); > + right = V_BSTR(args+1); > + > + V_VT(res) = VT_I2; > + ret = mode ? strcmpiW(left, right) : strcmpW(left, right); > + if (ret < 0) > + V_I2(res) = -1; > + else if (ret > 0) > + V_I2(res) = 1; > + else > + V_I2(res) = 0; Please use return_short() helper here. Thanks, Jacek

1 0

Re: [PATCH] wscript: Do case insensitive check for WSH/WScript item names
by Jacek Caban 04 Nov '16

04 Nov '16

On 04.11.2016 06:36, Nikolay Sivov wrote: > Signed-off-by: Nikolay Sivov <nsivov(a)codeweavers.com> > --- > > For https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=41651 > > programs/wscript/main.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/programs/wscript/main.c b/programs/wscript/main.c > index 3537f9d..e4bd676 100644 > --- a/programs/wscript/main.c > +++ b/programs/wscript/main.c > @@ -87,7 +87,7 @@ static HRESULT WINAPI ActiveScriptSite_GetItemInfo(IActiveScriptSite *iface, > { > WINE_TRACE("(%s %x %p %p)\n", wine_dbgstr_w(pstrName), dwReturnMask, ppunkItem, ppti); > > - if(strcmpW(pstrName, wshW) && strcmpW(pstrName, wscriptW)) > + if(strcmpiW(pstrName, wshW) && strcmpiW(pstrName, wscriptW)) > return E_FAIL; > > if(dwReturnMask & SCRIPTINFO_ITYPEINFO) { Looks good, but please add a test case. Thanks, Jacek

1 0

Re: [PATCH 1/3] dssenh/tests: The default container may already exist.
by Marvin 04 Nov '16

04 Nov '16

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=26439 Your paranoid android. === w864 (32 bit dssenh) === dssenh.c:642: Test failed: Incorrect decrypted data. dssenh.c:642: Test failed: Incorrect decrypted data. dssenh.c:642: Test failed: Incorrect decrypted data. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. === w1064 (32 bit dssenh) === dssenh.c:642: Test failed: Incorrect decrypted data. dssenh.c:642: Test failed: Incorrect decrypted data. dssenh.c:642: Test failed: Incorrect decrypted data. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. === w1064 (64 bit dssenh) === dssenh.c:642: Test failed: Incorrect decrypted data. dssenh.c:642: Test failed: Incorrect decrypted data. dssenh.c:642: Test failed: Incorrect decrypted data. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1348: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical.

2 1

Re: [PATCH 2/3] dssenh/tests: RC4 has been crippled in recent Windows versions.
by Marvin 04 Nov '16

04 Nov '16

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=26440 Your paranoid android. === w864 (32 bit dssenh) === dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. === w1064 (32 bit dssenh) === dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. === w1064 (64 bit dssenh) === dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical. dssenh.c:1349: Test failed: Decrypted data is not identical.

1 0

Re: [PATCH] vbscript: Implement StrComp()
by Marvin 04 Nov '16

04 Nov '16

Hi, While running your changed tests on Windows, I think I found new failures. Being a bot and all I'm not very good at pattern recognition, so I might be wrong, but could you please double-check? Full results can be found at https://testbot.winehq.org/JobDetails.pl?Key=26432 Your paranoid android. === wxppro (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2003std (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === wvistau64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2008s64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7u (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7pro64 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w8 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w864 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w1064 (32 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === wvistau64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w2008s64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w7pro64 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w864 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash === w1064 (64 bit) === Found no trace of the test summary line or of a crash

1 0

Re: [PATCH (resend) 3/8] winebus.sys: Implement removing IOHID devices
by Ken Thomases 04 Nov '16

04 Nov '16

On Nov 3, 2016, at 7:15 AM, Aric Stewart <aric(a)codeweavers.com> wrote: > > Signed-off-by: Aric Stewart <aric(a)codeweavers.com> > --- > dlls/winebus.sys/bus_iohid.c | 17 ++++++++++++++++- > 1 file changed, 16 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/dlls/winebus.sys/bus_iohid.c b/dlls/winebus.sys/bus_iohid.c > index f3e282c..c25a3b8 100644 > --- a/dlls/winebus.sys/bus_iohid.c > +++ b/dlls/winebus.sys/bus_iohid.c > @@ -120,7 +120,9 @@ static DWORD CFNumberToDWORD(CFNumberRef num) > > static int compare_platform_device(DEVICE_OBJECT *device, void *platform_dev) > { > - return 0; > + IOHIDDeviceRef dev1 = *(IOHIDDeviceRef*)get_platform_private(device); > + IOHIDDeviceRef dev2 = (IOHIDDeviceRef)platform_dev; > + return dev1 == dev2; The return value here has the reverse sense from how the caller interprets it. The caller, bus_find_hid_device(), interprets it like the result from strcmp() or memcmp(). A value of 0 means equal. Here, you're returning true (1) when the devices are equal. > }

1 1