re: WaitForMultipleObjectsEx will not take up to MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS

[Dan Kegel]

Bryan Mayland wrote:
> dlls/kernel/sync.c:173:
> 176     if (count >= MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS)
> 177     {
> 178         SetLastError(ERROR_INVALID_PARAMETER);
> 179         return WAIT_FAILED;
>
> Windows supports up to and including that number, wine only supports up
> to that number.

Congratulations, sounds like you found a bug in Wine!
> Since the rest of the code actually does support the
> full 64 wait objects, is there any reason this should not be changed to
> 176     if (count > MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS)

Looks like it should be changed.

You've helped greatly with your post.
You could help even more by posting a patch
that modifies dlls/kernel/tests/sync.c to incorporate your test
and also fixes the error.   Feel up to it?  Just yell if you
need help.

Thanks!
- Dan

--
Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv

WaitForMultipleObjectsEx will not take up to MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS

[Bryan Mayland]

Dan Kegel wrote:
> Congratulations, sounds like you found a bug in Wine!

Yay!  I'm glad I'm not crazy.
> Looks like it should be changed.
>
> You've helped greatly with your post.
> You could help even more by posting a patch
> that modifies dlls/kernel/tests/sync.c to incorporate your test
> and also fixes the error.

Yeah this is no problem at all.  My test app is 150 lines of ugly 
code whose purpose was to narrow down where the problem was, which was 
that MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS weren't supported.  You probably don't want to 
put all that socket code in just to test the event system.  Should the 
test I create actually just create MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS events and do a 
wait on them to verify that it can be done?

WaitForMultipleObjectsEx will not take up to MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS

[Dan Kegel]

On 3/21/06, Bryan Mayland  wrote:
> ...My test app is 150 lines of ugly
> code whose purpose was to narrow down where the problem was, which was
> that MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS weren't supported.  You probably don't want to
> put all that socket code in just to test the event system.

Right.
> Should the
> test I create actually just create MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS events and do a
> wait on them to verify that it can be done?

Yes.  Make the code as small and simple as possible
to check that one limit.
- Dan

--
Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv

WaitForMultipleObjectsEx will not take up to MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS

[Bryan Mayland]

Dan Kegel wrote:
> Yes.  Make the code as small and simple as possible
> to check that one limit.

I've sent the patch to wine-patches as suggested at winehq.  I'm not 
subscribed to that list though, so let me know if there are any problems 
receiving it or you don't like the test case.

Thanks for your guidance!

WaitForMultipleObjectsEx will not take up to MAXIMUM_WAIT_OBJECTS

[Dan Kegel]

On 3/21/06, Bryan Mayland  wrote:
> Dan Kegel wrote:
> > Yes.  Make the code as small and simple as possible
> > to check that one limit.
> I've sent the patch to wine-patches as suggested at winehq.  I'm not
>
> subscribed to that list though, so let me know if there are any problems
> receiving it or you don't like the test case.

I haven't seen it yet at
http://www.winehq.org/pipermail/wine-patches/2006-March/
so perhaps there was some trouble with mail.

Did you make sure the test passed on both wine and windows
when built as a standalone program?  e.g. if you happen to have
msvc and the platform sdk installed, and have your environment set
up right, you can just do

cd dlls/kernell/tests
cl -DSTANDALONE -D_X86_ -I../../../include sync.c

to compile the test as a standalone app, and
then run sync.exe on both Windows and Wine.

- Dan
>

--
Wine for Windows ISVs: http://kegel.com/wine/isv