Problem with XP scheduler?
in [Win32 Kernel]
|
From: Boba on 24 Dec 2009 16:31 "Leo Davidson" <leonudeldavidson(a)googlemail.com> wrote in message news:3c32e7f5-5e90-42d2-a42c-121935d9651d(a)s31g2000yqs.googlegroups.com... >So you're essentially saying the Ford Explorer was not a vehicle? >Riiiiiiight. no. im'saying it is ford motor co.s' resposibility to design and properly test the suspension in order to reduce the possibility of such a crash, instead they were trying to hide the problem. >You don't know that all the drivers on this system were WHQL tested. ??? >WHQL testing does not, and probably cannot, guarantee the drivers will >work in every situation. (WHQL is a series of tests, not a >mathematical proof!) Drivers for other OS have issues as well. agree. >You're running XP SP2 when SP3 has been out for ages. so?... i also run 4 versions of 95, 2 of 97, 2 of 98 (Au is missing), 6 of 2000, almost all of nts, ... and it goes all the way up to (but not including) w7. what makes you think i am not running xp_sp3? >You refuse to provide any data or do any proper investigation >into the problem. i really don't have any digital data to provide (see my reply to Don). plus, it's not a big deal to me - windows crash because of its internat problems - it crashes on me much more often due to what iam'doing to it. >You apparently just want us to magic-up an answer for you over >the Internet with almost zero information, all of it anecdotal, >and until someone can magic-up said answer you're going to point >your finger at something you dislike and arbitrarily blame that. i have not even asked a question. i do not expect any answers (not from you at least after seeing you in a mood far from being neutral, i wish you switch to the holiday mood soonest.) >(And you could be right that it's Windows, but the fact is you have no >evidence and experience shows it's almost always a 3rd party driver >issue. We are saying that you can't assign blame without evidence when >there are several other possibilities. i don't blame no one. i see no reason for and have no evidence of that. >You refuse to acknowledge the other possiblities because you'd rather >blame the thing you hate. i don't hate. there are things i do not like, and that xp2 box became 'an occasional freezer' after some software from an ms' licensed distributor has been installed, but i do need that package and what i do not like is the dexplore.exe: that pc never had a single problem before and it runs ok if dexplore is not loaded into memory. could the problem hide inside one of the drivers? - yes. is there a chance it is a 3rd party driver not certified by ms - no. >Even if it is Windows, which I very much doubt, we're talking about a >version that's almost a decade old and isn't even patched to the >latest service pack level, yet you're using this problem to make >general statements about Windows today.) well... i still see a lot businesses refusing to switch to windows: they are happily running 80386-based machines and are not looking for an alternative. (is this why there're no pentiums on mars?) and speaking of patching, when you ship your product out, do you expect your customer's machine being fully patched and up-to-dated? i use a different approach: i'd rather spend more effort to find a workaround for any possible situation by testing against as many versions as i can. Happy and Safe Holidays to ya'll!
From: tanix on 24 Dec 2009 16:45 In article <eMwPu9NhKHA.2132(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, "Alexander Grigoriev" <alegr(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc266483.aspx > >Forcing a system crash from the keyboard. Your keyboard is locked. > This allows to get a memory >snapsot for debugging. Zip and post it to some download site. > >"tanix" <tanix(a)mongo.net> wrote in message >news:hh0irt$e5o$7(a)news.eternal-september.org... >> In article <#AbolSLhKHA.2132(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, "Alexander Grigoriev" >> <alegr(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >> >>>Get a manually initiated full crash dump. >> >> There is no crash that I see. >> >> It is a hang in some dead loop. >> That is why it is taking 100% of your CPU. >> >> I can not run this app under user level debugger. >> I have to run it under kernel mode debugger >> and waste all sorts of time to even see anything >> that will give me any hope this thing is going to go away. >> >> Because who cares about XP nowadays with all this win 7 hype? >> Who is going to put it on high enough priority list >> to get fixed? >> > > -- Programmer's Goldmine collections: http://preciseinfo.org Tens of thousands of code examples and expert discussions on C++, MFC, VC, ATL, STL, templates, Java, Python, Javascript, organized by major topics of language, tools, methods, techniques.
From: Alexander Grigoriev on 24 Dec 2009 17:26 Keyboard is only locked at app level. The crash keystroke sequence is detected by the i8042.sys kernel driver, at DIRQL. "tanix" <tanix(a)mongo.net> wrote in message news:hh0ndf$rs3$1(a)news.eternal-september.org... > In article <eMwPu9NhKHA.2132(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, "Alexander Grigoriev" > <alegr(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>See http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/cc266483.aspx >> >>Forcing a system crash from the keyboard. > > Your keyboard is locked. > >> This allows to get a memory >>snapsot for debugging. Zip and post it to some download site. >> >>"tanix" <tanix(a)mongo.net> wrote in message >>news:hh0irt$e5o$7(a)news.eternal-september.org... >>> In article <#AbolSLhKHA.2132(a)TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl>, "Alexander >>> Grigoriev" >>> <alegr(a)earthlink.net> wrote: >>> >>>>Get a manually initiated full crash dump. >>> >>> There is no crash that I see. >>> >>> It is a hang in some dead loop. >>> That is why it is taking 100% of your CPU. >>> >>> I can not run this app under user level debugger. >>> I have to run it under kernel mode debugger >>> and waste all sorts of time to even see anything >>> that will give me any hope this thing is going to go away. >>> >>> Because who cares about XP nowadays with all this win 7 hype? >>> Who is going to put it on high enough priority list >>> to get fixed? >>> >> >> > > -- > Programmer's Goldmine collections: > > http://preciseinfo.org > > Tens of thousands of code examples and expert discussions on > C++, MFC, VC, ATL, STL, templates, Java, Python, Javascript, > organized by major topics of language, tools, methods, techniques. >
From: Leo Davidson on 25 Dec 2009 02:38 On Dec 24, 9:31 pm, "Boba" <B...(a)somewhere.net> wrote: > no. im'saying it is ford motor co.s' resposibility to But you said "Windows is not a proper multitasking OS" which is hogwash. If you want to make the weaker claim that, eight years ago, Microsoft may not have tested every aspect of the 3rd party drivers they shipped with the OS then that's fine, but also hardly a revelation. Testing every aspect of drivers is impossible, especially against the behaviour of programs from the future which haven't been written yet. More importantly, you have shown no proof that any of this is the result of drivers which shipped with Windows. It could be from 3rd party drivers you installed yourself. You have no evidence to back up your claims. >>You don't know that all the drivers on this system >> were WHQL tested. > > ??? Windows does not mandate that all drivers you install have passed WHQL testing. I thought everyone knew this? You are free to install drivers written by anyone which have not been put through WHQL. The only requirement in vanilla Windows is that drivers for 64-bit versions of Windows must be signed by the driver author. But Microsoft are not involved in that signing at all. It isn't a stamp of approval from Microsoft; it's proof of authorship and non-tampering of the binaries. > >You're running XP SP2 when SP3 has been out for ages. > > so?... So no only do you have no evidence for your claims but you're complaining about supposed bugs in an old version of an old OS. If SP2 wasn't important then why did you even mention it? > what makes you think i am not running xp_sp3? You explicitly saying you were using xp_sp2 in relation to the problem. Duh. > i really don't have any digital data to provide You have no evidence yet you've completely made up your mind and are trying to convince others. That makes you a charlatan, not a scientist. > windows crash because of its internat problems There you are making the claim again, yet you can't back it up with any evidence and chances are the crashes are due to 3rd party drivers which can crash any OS. > i don't blame no one. Haha. You keep blaming Microsoft & Windows.
From: Pavel A. on 25 Dec 2009 03:04
http://pavel_a.fastmail.fm/koshki/troll.jpg |