[Bug 43507] New: Page fault running ProcExp as soon as it starts
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43507 Bug ID: 43507 Summary: Page fault running ProcExp as soon as it starts Product: Wine Version: 2.14 Hardware: x86 OS: Linux Status: UNCONFIRMED Severity: normal Priority: P2 Component: -unknown Assignee: wine-bugs(a)winehq.org Reporter: alexchandel(a)gmail.com Distribution: --- ProcExp, available in the free SysInternals suite from MSDN, crashes immediately due to a page fault when run. Output: fixme:ver:GetCurrentPackageId (0x33f750 0x0): stub fixme:ver:GetCurrentPackageId (0x23f2b0 0x0): stub fixme:module:NtLoadDriver (0x23eb10), stub! fixme:ntdll:NtQuerySystemInformation (0x00000040,0x0,0x00000000,0x0) stub wine: Unhandled page fault on read access to 0x00000000 at address 0x0 (thread 0037), starting debugger... Unhandled exception: page fault on read access to 0x00000000 in 64-bit code (0x0000000000000000). Register dump: rip:0000000000000000 rsp:000000000023f9b8 rbp:0000000000000000 eflags:00010246 ( R- -- I Z- -P- ) rax:0000000000000000 rbx:0000000140116ff0 rcx:0000000000000000 rdx:0000000000000003 rsi:0000000140116be8 rdi:0000000140116ff8 r8:000000000023f9e0 r9:0000000140116ff0 r10:00007fffa4a54246 r11:0000000000000246 r12:0000000140110bb0 r13:0000000081f7f000 r14:000000000000000a r15:0000000140000000 Stack dump: 0x000000000023f9b8: 000000014005e05a 0000000000000000 0x000000000023f9c8: 0000000000000000 000000000023f9a8 0x000000000023f9d8: 000000000023f9b8 0000000000000000 0x000000000023f9e8: 0000000000000000 0000000000000001 0x000000000023f9f8: 000000014009417e 0000000000000000 0x000000000023fa08: 000000000023fb39 000000000000000a 0x000000000023fa18: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0x000000000023fa28: 0000000000000000 0000000000000098 0x000000000023fa38: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0x000000000023fa48: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0x000000000023fa58: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 0x000000000023fa68: 0000000000000000 0000000000000000 Backtrace: =>0 0x0000000000000000 (0x0000000000000000) 0x0000000000000000: -- no code accessible -- Modules: Module Address Debug info Name (264 modules) PE 40001000- 401ae000 Deferred libwine.1.0.dylib ELF 40640000- 406f6000 Deferred shlwapi<elf> \-PE 40650000- 406b3000 \ shlwapi ... -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43507 Fabian Maurer <dark.shadow4(a)web.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |dark.shadow4(a)web.de -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43507 Bernhard Übelacker <bernhardu(a)mailbox.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |bernhardu(a)mailbox.org --- Comment #1 from Bernhard Übelacker <bernhardu(a)mailbox.org> --- Running procexp64.exe 16.22 from SysinternalsSuite.zip as of 2018-12-18, with dl.winehq.org packages 8.9~bookworm-1, there is no immediate crash of procexp64.exe visible, instead it shows usual gui with the wine processes. Therefore I guess this bug can be closed as fixed? This procexp64.exe version cannot be the exact same one, but I hope it is near enough. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43507 Fabian Maurer <dark.shadow4(a)web.de> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|UNCONFIRMED |NEW URL| |https://web.archive.org/web | |/20170810171618/https://dow | |nload.sysinternals.com/file | |s/ProcessExplorer.zip Keywords| |download Ever confirmed|0 |1 --- Comment #2 from Fabian Maurer <dark.shadow4(a)web.de> --- I still get a crash using an older version, adding download link. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43507 --- Comment #3 from Fabian Maurer <dark.shadow4(a)web.de> --- EDIT: Crashes when using wine-8.9. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43507 --- Comment #4 from Bernhard Übelacker <bernhardu(a)mailbox.org> --- (In reply to Fabian Maurer from comment #3)
EDIT: Crashes when using wine-8.9.
Hello, thanks for the clarification, procexp64.exe version 16.21 shows it. There exists another bug report with more info about the same issue: bug #45926. Just uncommenting I_QueryTagInformation in the spec file is not enough, but the crash can be avoided by this modification: diff --git a/dlls/advapi32/advapi.c b/dlls/advapi32/advapi.c + +DWORD WINAPI I_QueryTagInformation(const WCHAR *machine, int level, void* info) +{ + FIXME("(%s, %d, %p) stub\n", debugstr_w(machine), level, info); + return ERROR_CALL_NOT_IMPLEMENTED; +} diff --git a/dlls/advapi32/advapi32.spec b/dlls/advapi32/advapi32.spec -# @ stub I_QueryTagInformation +@ stdcall I_QueryTagInformation(ptr long ptr) -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43507 --- Comment #5 from Fabian Maurer <dark.shadow4(a)web.de> --- Will you submit that and the fix for bug 54999 as merge request? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43507 --- Comment #6 from Bernhard Übelacker <bernhardu(a)mailbox.org> --- (In reply to Fabian Maurer from comment #5)
Will you submit that and the fix for bug 54999 as merge request?
I am not sure. Was this function commented out in the spec file for a reason? -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43507 --- Comment #7 from Fabian Maurer <dark.shadow4(a)web.de> --- It got added commented out, since nothing needed it yet, but this program does need it. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43507 Bernhard Übelacker <bernhardu(a)mailbox.org> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Resolution|--- |DUPLICATE Status|NEW |RESOLVED --- Comment #8 from Bernhard Übelacker <bernhardu(a)mailbox.org> --- Nearly forgot about that one. But I hope it is ok to resolving duplicate as versions v16.22 or above no longer call I_QueryTagInformation unconditionally and #45926 has more details. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 45926 *** -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
https://bugs.winehq.org/show_bug.cgi?id=43507 Gijs Vermeulen <gijsvrm(a)gmail.com> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Status|RESOLVED |CLOSED --- Comment #9 from Gijs Vermeulen <gijsvrm(a)gmail.com> --- Closing. -- Do not reply to this email, post in Bugzilla using the above URL to reply. You are receiving this mail because: You are watching all bug changes.
participants (2)
-
wine-bugs＠winehq.org -
WineHQ Bugzilla