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

Re: [3/3] ntdll: Add more tests for calling int $0x2d on x86 and x86_64.
by Marvin 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '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=20653 Your paranoid android. === wvistau64 (32 bit exception) === exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x3e0000/0x3e0001 exception: unhandled exception 80000004 at 003E0000 exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x77baed97/0x3e0001 === w7u (32 bit exception) === exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x2f0000/0x2f0001 exception: unhandled exception 80000004 at 002F0000 exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x77cde34f/0x2f0001 === w1064 (32 bit exception) === Failure running script in VM: network read timed out (Connect:AgentVersion.h:0/9) === w1064 (64 bit exception) === Failure running script in VM: network read timed out (Connect:AgentVersion.h:0/9)

1 0

Re: [PATCH] packet: create packet.dll and Implement GetAdapterNames(try 3)
by Sebastian Lackner 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

On 18.02.2016 11:15, Jianqiu Zhang wrote: > From 4810b411a8b76ce09356da0333d5aef434e30465 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 > From: Jianqiu Zhang <zhangjianqiu_133(a)yeah.net> > Date: Sun, 14 Feb 2016 17:27:37 +0800 > Subject: [PATCH] packet: create packet.dll and Implement GetAdapterNames > > Signed-off-by: Jianqiu Zhang <zhangjianqiu_133(a)yeah.net> It seems your mail client corrupted the patch. To workaround that, you can send your patch as attachment. Also, you either attached the wrong version of your patch, or missed some of the feedback I gave in the last reply. The memory leaks and ordinals in the spec file are still present for example.

1 0

Re: ntdll/tests: Add more tests for calling int $0x2d on x86 and x86_64. (v2)
by Marvin 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '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=20657 Your paranoid android. === wvistau64 (32 bit exception) === exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x2d0000/0x2d0001 exception: unhandled exception 80000004 at 002D0000 exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x77baed97/0x2d0001 === w7u (32 bit exception) === exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x2f0000/0x2f0001 exception: unhandled exception 80000004 at 002F0000 exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x77cde34f/0x2f0001 === w1064 (32 bit exception) === Failure running script in VM: network read timed out (Connect:AgentVersion.h:0/9) === w1064 (64 bit exception) === Failure running script in VM: network read timed out (Connect:AgentVersion.h:0/9)

2 1

Re: [2/3] ntdll: Implement handling of int $0x2d for x86_64.
by Sebastian Lackner 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

On 18.02.2016 09:58, Sebastian Lackner wrote: > Signed-off-by: Sebastian Lackner <sebastian(a)fds-team.de> > --- > dlls/ntdll/signal_x86_64.c | 53 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++-- > 1 file changed, 51 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > I'd like to add the remark, that depending on the logic of the anti-debugger trick, more work is necessary for proper int $0x2d support on x86_64. What we also need is the equivalent of http://source.winehq.org/git/wine.git/patch/eab168cf9eaa6ed9f8800b25155d329… for x86_64. I'll take care of that when I know that the first three patches are fine.

1 0

Re: [3/3] ntdll: Add more tests for calling int $0x2d on x86 and x86_64.
by Marvin 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '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=20653 Your paranoid android. === wvistau64 (32 bit exception) === exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x2c0000/0x2c0001 exception: unhandled exception 80000004 at 002C0000 exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x77baed97/0x2c0001 === w7u (32 bit exception) === exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x3f0000/0x3f0001 exception: unhandled exception 80000004 at 003F0000 exception.c:490: Test failed: 42: Unexpected eip 0x77cde34f/0x3f0001 === w1064 (32 bit exception) === Failure running script in VM: network read timed out (Connect:AgentVersion.h:0/9) === w1064 (64 bit exception) === Failure running script in VM: network read timed out (Connect:AgentVersion.h:0/9)

1 0

Re: [PATCH 2/2] ntdll: Improve invalid parameter handling in NtAccessCheck. (try 3)
by Marvin 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '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=20648 Your paranoid android. === w1064 (32 bit security) === security.c:3945: Test failed: MACHINE\Software owner SID (S-1-5-18) != Administrators SID (S-1-5-32-544). security.c:3986: Test failed: Builtin Users ACE has unexpected flags (0x12 != 0xa) security.c:3990: Test failed: Builtin Users ACE has unexpected mask (0x20019 != 0x80000000) security.c:3999: Test failed: Builtin Admins ACE has unexpected flags (0x12 != 0x0)

1 0

Re: [PATCH 1/2] advapi32/tests: Add more invalid parameter tests for AccessCheck. (try 3)
by Marvin 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '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=20647 Your paranoid android. === w1064 (32 bit security) === security.c:3964: Test failed: MACHINE\Software owner SID (S-1-5-18) != Administrators SID (S-1-5-32-544). security.c:4005: Test failed: Builtin Users ACE has unexpected flags (0x12 != 0xa) security.c:4009: Test failed: Builtin Users ACE has unexpected mask (0x20019 != 0x80000000) security.c:4018: Test failed: Builtin Admins ACE has unexpected flags (0x12 != 0x0)

1 0

Re: [PATCH 2/3] ntdll: Improve invalid parameter handling in NtAccessCheck. (try 2)
by Alexandre Julliard 18 Feb '16

18 Feb '16

Qian Hong <qhong(a)codeweavers.com> writes: > @@ -1586,7 +1586,16 @@ NtAccessCheck( > SecurityDescriptor, ClientToken, DesiredAccess, GenericMapping, > PrivilegeSet, ReturnLength, GrantedAccess, AccessStatus); > > - if (!PrivilegeSet || !ReturnLength) > + if (!ReturnLength) > + return STATUS_ACCESS_VIOLATION; > + > + if (*ReturnLength == 0) > + { > + *ReturnLength = sizeof(PRIVILEGE_SET); Shouldn't this depend on the number of privileges to be returned? -- Alexandre Julliard julliard(a)winehq.org

2 1

Re: shell32/tests: Only look for Explorer windows for the progman tests.
by Marvin 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '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=20640 Your paranoid android. === w2003std (32 bit progman_dde) === progman_dde.c:383: Test failed: Window "C:\Documents and Settings\All Users\Start Menu\Programs\Group1" was not created in 45 seconds - assumed failure. [S_G:12]

1 0

Re: crypt32/tests: Clarify some base64 test failed messages.
by Marvin 17 Feb '16

17 Feb '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=20639 Your paranoid android. === w1064 (32 bit base64) === base64.c:342: Test failed: Expected ERROR_INVALID_DATA, got ret=1 le=13 base64.c:342: Test failed: Expected ERROR_INVALID_DATA, got ret=1 le=13 base64.c:342: Test failed: Expected ERROR_INVALID_DATA, got ret=1 le=13 === w1064 (64 bit base64) === base64.c:342: Test failed: Expected ERROR_INVALID_DATA, got ret=1 le=13 base64.c:342: Test failed: Expected ERROR_INVALID_DATA, got ret=1 le=13 base64.c:342: Test failed: Expected ERROR_INVALID_DATA, got ret=1 le=13

1 0