I think this might be an SP/MP difference?
Would make sense if KeAcquireSpinLock inside an SP kernel becomes
KeRaiseIrql. But even for a 2003 MP kernel this would serve no purpose.


On 2015-12-29 21:48, Ged Murphy wrote:
> It depends on whether we want to emulate the 2k3 kernel or not.
> 
> I noticed in my 2k3 fltmgr testing that IoEnumerateDeviceObjectList runs at
> DPC for the entirety of the function. This was changed in the NT6 kernel to
> use a lock, which is indeed the LockQueueIoDatabaseLock Hermes mentioned.
> 
> I'm happy to use the spinlock (and would prefer to myself), but any move
> towards NT6 normally results in an angry email, so I opted for the 2k3
> approach  ;)
> 
> Ged.
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ros-dev [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Hermès
> BÉLUSCA - MAÏTO
> Sent: 29 December 2015 16:08
> To: 'ReactOS Development List' <[email protected]>
> Subject: Re: [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [gedmurphy] 70408: [NTOSKRNL] - Raise the
> IRQL when enumerating device lists so it doesn't get edited mid-listing -
> Don't hardcode the pointer size when checking the buffer size
> 
> Yes this should be a spinlock involved instead, for example the
> "LockQueueIoDatabaseLock" (queued) spinlock that we already use in other
> places in the code.
> 
> -----Message d'origine-----
> De : Ros-dev [mailto:[email protected]] De la part de Thomas Faber
> Envoyé : mardi 29 décembre 2015 13:20 À : [email protected] Objet : Re:
> [ros-dev] [ros-diffs] [gedmurphy] 70408: [NTOSKRNL] - Raise the IRQL when
> enumerating device lists so it doesn't get edited mid-listing - Don't
> hardcode the pointer size when checking the buffer size
> 
> Uhm... raising the IRQL is not a synchronization mechanism. Should there be
> a spinlock involved?
> 
> 
> On 2015-12-23 12:26, [email protected] wrote:
>> Author: gedmurphy
>> Date: Wed Dec 23 11:26:28 2015
>> New Revision: 70408
>>
>> URL: http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos?rev=70408&view=rev
>> Log:
>> [NTOSKRNL]
>> - Raise the IRQL when enumerating device lists so it doesn't get 
>> edited mid-listing
>> - Don't hardcode the pointer size when checking the buffer size
>>
>> Modified:
>>     trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/io/iomgr/device.c
>>
>> Modified: trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/io/iomgr/device.c
>> URL: 
>> http://svn.reactos.org/svn/reactos/trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/io/iomgr/dev
>> ice.c?rev=70408&r1=70407&r2=70408&view=diff
>>
> ============================================================================
> ==
>> --- trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/io/iomgr/device.c [iso-8859-1] (original)
>> +++ trunk/reactos/ntoskrnl/io/iomgr/device.c [iso-8859-1] Wed Dec 23
> 11:26:28 2015
>> @@ -1088,6 +1088,10 @@
>>  {
>>      ULONG ActualDevices = 1;
>>      PDEVICE_OBJECT CurrentDevice = DriverObject->DeviceObject;
>> +    KIRQL OldIrql;
>> +
>> +    /* Raise to dispatch level */
>> +    KeRaiseIrql(DISPATCH_LEVEL, &OldIrql);
>>  
>>      /* Find out how many devices we'll enumerate */
>>      while ((CurrentDevice = CurrentDevice->NextDevice))
>> ActualDevices++; @@ -1099,13 +1103,14 @@
>>      *ActualNumberDeviceObjects = ActualDevices;
>>  
>>      /* Check if we can support so many */
>> -    if ((ActualDevices * 4) > DeviceObjectListSize)
>> +    if ((ActualDevices * sizeof(PDEVICE_OBJECT)) >
>> + DeviceObjectListSize)
>>      {
>>          /* Fail because the buffer was too small */
>> +        KeLowerIrql(OldIrql);
>>          return STATUS_BUFFER_TOO_SMALL;
>>      }
>>  
>> -    /* Check if the caller only wanted the size */
>> +    /* Check if the caller wanted the device list */
>>      if (DeviceObjectList)
>>      {
>>          /* Loop through all the devices */ @@ -1123,6 +1128,9 @@
>>              DeviceObjectList++;
>>          }
>>      }
>> +
>> +    /* Return back to previous IRQL */
>> +    KeLowerIrql(OldIrql);
>>  
>>      /* Return the status */
>>      return STATUS_SUCCESS;
>>
>>


_______________________________________________
Ros-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev

Reply via email to