Re: [PATCH v2] winebus.sys: Implement common IRP_MJ_POWER handling

[Sebastian Lackner]

On 05.10.2016 15:01, Aric Stewart wrote:
> v2: Suggestions from Sebastian Lackner
> Signed-off-by: Aric Stewart
>
> dlls/winebus.sys/bus.h      |  1 +
>  dlls/winebus.sys/bus_udev.c |  1 +
>  dlls/winebus.sys/main.c     | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
>  3 files changed, 23 insertions(+)

I have submitted a patch which initializes all MajorFunction handlers with
a stub implementation [1]. This also matches Windows behavior. Please let
me know if you think this patch should still be applied (I guess on Windows
the bus drivers handle IRP_MJ_POWER, right?) or if we should skip it for now
if it was just to fix the crash.

[1] http://source.winehq.org/patches/data/126881

Regards,
Sebastian

[PATCH v2] winebus.sys: Implement common IRP_MJ_POWER handling

[Aric Stewart]

On 10/5/16 3:38 PM, Sebastian Lackner wrote:
> On 05.10.2016 15:01, Aric Stewart wrote:
> > v2: Suggestions from Sebastian Lackner
> > Signed-off-by: Aric Stewart
> >
> > dlls/winebus.sys/bus.h      |  1 +
> >  dlls/winebus.sys/bus_udev.c |  1 +
> >  dlls/winebus.sys/main.c     | 21 +++++++++++++++++++++
> >  3 files changed, 23 insertions(+)
>
> I have submitted a patch which initializes all MajorFunction handlers with
> a stub implementation [1]. This also matches Windows behavior. Please let
> me know if you think this patch should still be applied (I guess on Windows
> the bus drivers handle IRP_MJ_POWER, right?) or if we should skip it for now
> if it was just to fix the crash.
>
> [1] http://source.winehq.org/patches/data/126881

Your patch should be sufficient. Right now none of our bus drivers need to handle this but if we find a case where they do then we can add an implementaion.

-aric
> Regards,
> Sebastian