Re: kernel32: Don't set unconditionally SECTION_QUERY flag in OpenFileMapping.

[Dmitry Timoshkov]

Thanks, I have only style related comments, and since I'm an author of
existing tests I'd prefer to keep an original style if possible.

Jacek Caban  wrote:
> --- a/dlls/advapi32/tests/security.c
> +++ b/dlls/advapi32/tests/security.c
> @@ -5560,17 +5560,23 @@ static void test_filemap_security(void)
>      char temp_path[MAX_PATH];
>      char file_name[MAX_PATH];
>      DWORD ret, i, access;
> - HANDLE file, mapping, dup;
> - HANDLE file, mapping, dup, created_mapping;
> static const struct
> {
> -
>    int generic, mapped;
> -
>    DWORD generic, mapped;

Please leave 'int' type, it changes nothing.
> -
>    BOOL open_only;
> } map[] =
>    {
>        { 0, 0 },
>        { GENERIC_READ, STANDARD_RIGHTS_READ | SECTION_QUERY | SECTION_MAP_READ },
>        { GENERIC_WRITE, STANDARD_RIGHTS_WRITE | SECTION_MAP_WRITE },
>        { GENERIC_EXECUTE, STANDARD_RIGHTS_EXECUTE | SECTION_MAP_EXECUTE },
> -
>    { GENERIC_ALL, STANDARD_RIGHTS_REQUIRED | SECTION_ALL_ACCESS }
> -
>    { GENERIC_ALL, STANDARD_RIGHTS_REQUIRED | SECTION_ALL_ACCESS },
> -
>    { SECTION_MAP_READ | SECTION_MAP_WRITE, SECTION_MAP_READ | SECTION_MAP_WRITE},
> -
>    { SECTION_MAP_WRITE, SECTION_MAP_WRITE},
> -
>    { SECTION_MAP_READ | SECTION_QUERY, SECTION_MAP_READ | SECTION_QUERY},
> -
>    { SECTION_QUERY, SECTION_MAP_READ, TRUE },
> -
>    { SECTION_QUERY | SECTION_MAP_READ, SECTION_QUERY | SECTION_MAP_READ }
> };
>    static const struct
>    {
>
> @@ -5599,6 +5605,8 @@ static void test_filemap_security(void)
>  for (i = 0; i < sizeof(prot_map)/sizeof(prot_map[0]); i++)
>  {
> -
>    if (map[i].open_only) continue;
> -
>    SetLastError(0xdeadbeef);
>    mapping = CreateFileMappingW(file, NULL, prot_map[i].prot, 0, 4096, NULL);
>    if (prot_map[i].mapped)
>
> @@ -5645,6 +5653,8 @@ static void test_filemap_security(void)
>  for (i = 0; i < sizeof(map)/sizeof(map[0]); i++)
>  {
> -
>    if (map[i].open_only) continue;
> -
>    SetLastError( 0xdeadbeef );
>    ret = DuplicateHandle(GetCurrentProcess(), mapping, GetCurrentProcess(), &dup,
>                          map[i].generic, FALSE, 0);
>
> @@ -5659,6 +5669,24 @@ static void test_filemap_security(void)
>      CloseHandle(mapping);
>      CloseHandle(file);
>      DeleteFileA(file_name);
> -
> - created_mapping = CreateFileMappingA( INVALID_HANDLE_VALUE, NULL, PAGE_READWRITE, 0, 0x1000,
> -
>                                     "Wine Test Open Mapping");
> - ok( created_mapping != NULL, "CreateFileMapping failed with error %u\n", GetLastError() );
> -
> - for(i=0; i < sizeof(map)/sizeof(*map); i++)

Please add spaces around '=' and use sizeof(map[0]) for consistency with existing
code.
> - {
> -
>    if (!map[i].generic) continue;
> -
> -
>    mapping = OpenFileMappingA( map[i].generic, FALSE, "Wine Test Open Mapping");
> -
>    ok( mapping != NULL, "OpenFileMapping failed with error %d\n", GetLastError());
> -
>    access = get_obj_access( mapping );
> -
>    ok( access == map[i].mapped, "[%d] unexpected access flags %x, expected %x\n",
> -
>        i, access, map[i].mapped );

Please use "%d:" instead of [%d] and %#x instead of %x for consistency
with existing code.

P.S.
That's perfectly fine to completely ignore my comments, just wanted to show
how it looks like for comparison with d3d-like acceptance policy :)