[PATCH 0/1] MR3660: secur32: Increment iteration index after load_package error

[Lorenzo Ferrillo (＠llde)]

Otherwise if a package fail to load the routine is stuck in a continuos loop trying to load the
package, resulting in a loader deadlock. 

This was manifested as a regression when starting visual studio 2019, trying to load the SSO lsa package, that was failing because no SSO.dll was present (or loadable)

Restore the behaviour before commit 021547cabcb811c38060a2f7e675c25d26f16d3d (Pull Request !3472)
Signed-Off-By: Lorenzo Ferrillo <lorenzofersteam(a)live.it>

-- 
https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/3660

[PATCH 1/1] secur32: Increment iteration index after load_package error

[llde]

From: llde <lorenzofersteam(a)live.it>

Otherwise if a package fail to load the routine is stuck in a continuos loop trying to load the
package, resulting in a loader deadlock
Restore the behaviour before commit 021547cabcb811c38060a2f7e675c25d26f16d3d
Signed-Off-By: Lorenzo Ferrillo <lorenzofersteam(a)live.it>
---
 dlls/secur32/lsa.c | 3 +--
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/dlls/secur32/lsa.c b/dlls/secur32/lsa.c
index a9ca8b60283..0f9b8dceb39 100644
--- a/dlls/secur32/lsa.c
+++ b/dlls/secur32/lsa.c
@@ -967,11 +967,10 @@ void load_auth_packages(void)
         if (err != ERROR_SUCCESS)
             continue;
 
-        if (!load_package(name, &package, i + 1))
+        if (!load_package(name, &package, ++i))
             continue;
 
         add_package(&package);
-        i++;
     }
 
     RegCloseKey(root);
-- 
GitLab

https://gitlab.winehq.org/wine/wine/-/merge_requests/3660

[PATCH 1/1] secur32: Increment iteration index after load_package error

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

llde <wine(a)gitlab.winehq.org> wrote:
> From: llde <lorenzofersteam(a)live.it>

Please use your full name when submitting patches.
> diff --git a/dlls/secur32/lsa.c b/dlls/secur32/lsa.c
> index a9ca8b60283..0f9b8dceb39 100644
> --- a/dlls/secur32/lsa.c
> +++ b/dlls/secur32/lsa.c
> @@ -967,11 +967,10 @@ void load_auth_packages(void)
>          if (err != ERROR_SUCCESS)
>              continue;
>
> -        if (!load_package(name, &package, i + 1))
> +        if (!load_package(name, &package, ++i))
>              continue;
>
> add_package(&package);
> -        i++;
>      }

Thanks for spotting this. Although I'd personally prefer it to look like
if (load_package(name, &package, i + 1))
    add_package(&package);

-- 
Dmitry.