* On Fri, 5 Oct 2012, Christian Costa wrote:
2012/10/5 Dmitry Timoshkov dmitry@baikal.ru
What matters is what drivers need. I can add some typical fields if needed but that could be done in other patches when needed as well.
There are basic things like the header and object list management, besides things like ActiveProcessors, Affinity, BasePriority is not hard to fill from the start. Probably you need to duscuss how this should be done, something tells me that without server support this is not going to work very well.
What do you mean by object list management ?There is only one element for now : nothing before nothing after. Unless lists are circular.
I'm open for discussion but it's hard without an idea of what drivers do and what we want to support since wine is not intended to run all driver types.
So at the beginning, maybe we can do something simple and improve the infrastructure as needs appear.
This is nth time the discussion drives to the question: How do you test ntoskrnl &co functionality, folks?
I suppose Christian debugs some application which loads own, custom sys-drivers.
Wine has no tests which would build / load some simple sys-driver; and that needs to change in future, I'd say. Well, this topic already was brought in once by Damjan Jovanovic. [1]
Plus, there are guys compiling kernel mode drivers with MinGW(-64) already: [2][3][4]
Or am I misunderstanding the right way to go?
S.
[1] http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-devel/2010-March/082460.html [2] http://strdup.livejournal.com/34596.html [3] http://sourceforge.net/projects/mingw-w64/forums/forum/723797/topic/3163052 [4] http://www.fccps.cz/download/adv/frr/win32_ddk_mingw/win32_ddk_mingw.html