Raphael Junqueira asked on bugzilla what the safedisc status is. Currently it works fine, and I believe what we have is more or less ready for CVS. However Vitaly told me Alexandre didn't like the object manager Vitaly wrote, mostly he didn't like permanent objects, that drivers depend on. I haven't talked to Alexandre about this but hopefully some reasonable solution can be found so we can get Vitaly's OM into wineserver (I mean my original implementation that uses pointers as handles also works, but things look better with a real OM). So let's try and trigger some community discussion, we are talking about the guts of wine after all. Vitaly, what's the OM status currently? Alexandre, what didn't you like about it? Ivan.
Monday, November 21, 2005, 4:54:56 PM, Ivan Leo Puoti wrote:
Raphael Junqueira asked on bugzilla what the safedisc status is. Currently it works fine, and I believe what we have is more or less ready for CVS. However Vitaly told me Alexandre didn't like the object manager Vitaly wrote, mostly he didn't like permanent objects, that drivers depend on. I haven't talked to Alexandre about this but hopefully some reasonable solution can be found so we can get Vitaly's OM into wineserver (I mean my original implementation that uses pointers as handles also works, but things look better with a real OM). So let's try and trigger some community discussion, we are talking about the guts of wine after all. Vitaly, what's the OM status currently? Alexandre, what didn't you like about it?
Following Alexandre's suggestions I've managed to get OM working without support for permanent objects. There will be some modification required for ntoskrnl for that to work. I'm just about finished integrating new OM into ntoskrnl tree and almost ready to give it a try. As far as OM goes it's mostly finished and passes all but two of om tests. Also it don't see any side-affects from it either. All the programs I've tested work in the same way as they were before. All named object moved to directories and using RootDirectory part of OBJECT_ATTRIBUTES for create/open. Attached is the final revision of the directory object implementation. If it looks ok I'm ready to send some patches <g> Vitaliy
* On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
* Monday, November 21, 2005, 4:54:56 PM, Ivan Leo Puoti wrote:
Raphael Junqueira asked on bugzilla what the safedisc status is. Currently it works fine, and I believe what we have is more or less ready for CVS. However Vitaly told me Alexandre didn't like the object manager Vitaly wrote, mostly he didn't like permanent objects, that drivers depend on.
Following Alexandre's suggestions I've managed to get OM working without support for permanent objects. There will be some modification required for ntoskrnl for that to work. I'm just about finished integrating new OM into ntoskrnl tree and almost ready to give it a try.
As far as OM goes it's mostly finished and passes all but two of om tests. Also it don't see any side-affects from it either. All the programs I've tested work in the same way as they were before. All named object moved to directories and using RootDirectory part of OBJECT_ATTRIBUTES for create/open.
Attached is the final revision of the directory object implementation. If it looks ok I'm ready to send some patches <g>
Any updates on this? What lefts to be done for ntoskrnl to enter the tree? :)
--- Saulius Krasuckas <saulius2(a)ar.fi.lt> wrote:
* On Mon, 21 Nov 2005, Vitaliy Margolen wrote:
* Monday, November 21, 2005, 4:54:56 PM, Ivan Leo Puoti wrote:
Raphael Junqueira asked on bugzilla what the safedisc status is. Currently it works fine, and I believe what we have is more or less ready for CVS. However Vitaly told me Alexandre didn't like the object manager Vitaly wrote, mostly he didn't like permanent objects, that drivers depend on.
Following Alexandre's suggestions I've managed to get OM working without support for permanent objects. There will be some modification required for ntoskrnl for that to work. I'm just about finished integrating new OM into ntoskrnl tree and almost ready to give it a try.
As far as OM goes it's mostly finished and passes all but two of om tests. Also it don't see any side-affects from it either. All the programs I've tested work in the same way as they were before. All named object moved to directories and using RootDirectory part of OBJECT_ATTRIBUTES for create/open.
Attached is the final revision of the directory object implementation. If it looks ok I'm ready to send some patches <g>
Any updates on this? What lefts to be done for ntoskrnl to enter the tree? :)
I've waited so long for this mythical ntoskrnl.exe that "doesn't change NtDeviceIoControl()" and "uses IPCs" to finally enter CVS. Can you please mail around a sample of the code so we have some idea of how on earth it works, I'm dying to know... Thank you Damjan __________________________________________ Yahoo! DSL Something to write home about. Just $16.99/mo. or less. dsl.yahoo.com
participants (4)
-
Damjan Jovanovic -
Ivan Leo Puoti -
Saulius Krasuckas -
Vitaliy Margolen