[ofw] Vista supported?

[Tzachi Dar]

Hi,

As far as for the compiler bugs it seems that it has a simple
workaround, see bellow for ideas that I have.

The main issue that I currently see is that we are getting close to a
new release, and replacing the compiler so close to a release is not
that good idea. As you said, for now we can continue based on the binary
computability of vista.

Thanks
Tzachi

2 ways in order to work around the compiler bugs:
As remembered the problem is because we have to make sure that we
reserve 64 bit for a pointer even on 32 bit systems. The obvious way to
do this is to use __ptr64 that doesn't work on new builds.
1) As was suggested in the OSR forum, one can simply change the struct
to use a union of the pointer and some 64 bits value.
2) one can use the same struct as before but do some other thing:
void test(long val)
{
        if (val == 0)
                return;

        // the following line crashes the 6000/6001 WDK 32-bit compiler
with
        // error C1001: An internal error has occurred in the compiler.
        //var1->funcPtr(0);
        var2 = var1->funcPtr;
        var2(0); // Very ugly but Compiles well
}


> -----Original Message-----
> From: ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org
> [mailto:ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Jan Bottorff
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 10:21 PM
> To: Mirko Benz; ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
> Subject: RE: [ofw] Vista supported?
>
> I know the WinIB source tree will not compile with the Vista
> (or later) WDK (at least will not compile for checked 32-bit
> platforms). The problem is the compiler aborts when
> processing __ptr64 pointers inside a structure. The WinIB
> stack uses this in LOTS of places.
>
> I'm not super optimistic about Microsoft fixing the compiler
> anytime soon, because I also see compiler bugs in the code
> generation for InterlockedAnd (and other Interlocked
> functions) that have been know for more than a year, are not
> fixed. The most recent WDK betas seems to have a fix for
> InterlockedAnd in the debug build, but the free build still
> gets it wrong.
>
> The following will reproduce the __ptr64 bug:
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> #include <ntddk.h>
>
> struct {
>       void (* __ptr64 funcPtr)(long val); } *var1;
>
>
>
>
> void test(long val)
> {
>       if (val == 0)
>               return;
>
>       // the following line crashes the 6000/6001 WDK 32-bit
> compiler with
>       // error C1001: An internal error has occurred in the compiler.
>       var1->funcPtr(0);
> }
>
> NTSTATUS DriverEntry(PDRIVER_OBJECT  DriverObject, PUNICODE_STRING
> RegistryPath)
> {
>       var1->funcPtr = &test;
>       test(1);
>       return STATUS_SUCCESS;
> }
> --------------------------------------------------------------
>
> The InterlockedAnd bug shows up in code like:
>
> // atomic test and clear
> If (InterlockedAnd(&flag, 0)) {
>       // this code never executes
>       // InterlockedAnd is documented to return the old value
>       // but actually returns the modified value }
>
> Binaries compiled using the W2k3 SP1 DDK can run on Vista,
> but doing development on the latest tools is a serious
> problem. I view it a Microsoft problem, since it was
> something in the Vista (and later) WDK compiler that broke.
>
> - Jan
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org
> [mailto:ofw-bounces at lists.openfabrics.org] On Behalf Of Mirko Benz
> Sent: Friday, May 25, 2007 1:38 AM
> To: ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
> Subject: [ofw] Vista supported?
>
> Hi,
>
> What is the status of support for Vista? Should SRP work?
>
> Regards,
> Mirko
> _______________________________________________
> ofw mailing list
> ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
> http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ofw
> _______________________________________________
> ofw mailing list
> ofw at lists.openfabrics.org
> http://lists.openfabrics.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ofw
> 

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openfabrics.org/pipermail/ofw/attachments/20070526/c86c41b1/attachment.html>