From: tanix on 23 Dec 2009 07:55 In article <uhyQMswgKHA.5460(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>, "Boba" <Boba(a)somewhere.net> wrote: >"Tim Roberts" <timr(a)probo.com> wrote in message >news:kcmti5h5t6k7pj9mhh519e76mgheppmg9s(a)4ax.com... >> ... >> A software problem cannot cause your machine to lock up so hard >> that even mouse and keyboard stop. > >lol...u'gotto'bekidding... >even some software written by professionals from MicroSoft >not just can do that but also _does_ it, and does it on a >regular basis with _every_ single version of Windows with >no exception so far. Mr. Roberts, please, do not fool the >audience, we do respect your opinion... Boba TC And that is what I saw so many times, that I do not even care to remember how many. And that means that win is NOT a fully multitasking system. I do not recall when I saw the same thing happening under Linux. I'd have to scrach my cockpit to even recall such a thing. -- 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: tanix on 23 Dec 2009 08:00 In article <OWFVEr4gKHA.5380(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl>, "Boba" <Boba(a)somewhere.net> wrote: >"Don Burn" <burn(a)stopspam.windrvr.com> wrote in message >news:euMp3ywgKHA.6096(a)TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl... >> ... >> Tim Roberts is a highly experienced windows developer, > >absolutely agree; that's why i couldn't hold it. > >> please show your data, since the only published data I know of contradicts >> you. > >would this particular news thread serve the one? >wouldn't it? "published data" you're talking about >is exactly a sign of system behaving properly (at >least responsive to some extend); what my concern >is those unfortunate situations when you can't even >get any dump from completely frozen box caused by >powerpnt, winword, excel to name a few. Yep, and the suggestions I heard to try to get some info on this freeze would mean I'd had to spend quite some time to even HOPE to be able to see where it could be. But my original question was: what could POSSIBLY do such a thing in the firefox? Do they have a kernel mode driver? And for WHAT kind of thing? About the only think I can think of is the rendering engine efficiency hack of some sort. -- 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: tanix on 23 Dec 2009 08:10 In article <da4e6a99-fc5b-432d-bb23-81329d14289f(a)v30g2000yqm.googlegroups.com>, Leo Davidson <leonudeldavidson(a)googlemail.com> wrote: >On Dec 23, 4:45=A0am, "Boba" <B...(a)somewhere.net> wrote: >> "Don Burn" <b...(a)stopspam.windrvr.com> wrote in message >> >> get any dump from completely frozen box caused by >> powerpnt, winword, excel to name a few. > >You're just assuming, with no evidence, that it is powerpnt, winword, >excel or firefox that are responsible for the lock-ups you've seen >when they may just be the trigger. That is what I smell. >In fact, I'd replace "may" with "must" because even if a user-level >app does something deeply wrong, the drivers (or OS itself) are still >at fault if they allow that to lock-up the entire system. Exactly the right point from what I see, and I am still waiting to see something that actually makes sense in the scheme of things. Btw, I am not sure I posted the latest scoop on this lockup. Since I removed all firefox addons except of imacros, which is the most important addon for me, I did not see a single lock up so far, and I did try to stretch it as much as I could by doing the same thing that would lock up the box originally, only several times in a row, non stop, and it still hold fine. Question: what could POSSIBLY be the reason some funky addon would cause even MOUSE to freeze, assuming it IS what was causing it? I doubt ANY of these funky addons even know what kernel mode drivers are. >At this point people usually reply asking why, if it's the drivers (or >OS) at fault, does the problem only occur when particular software is >used. Yes, at least in this case. The ONLY thing that I recall locking up my new box was firefox. I did TONS of work since then and ran ALL sorts of heavy duty apps that DO use tons of threads and load up the box as bad as it gets. And I did run memtest86 and Prime95 stress tests for hours. Not a single issue found. > The obvious answer is that different software does different >things -- even when performing the same high-level tasks there are >many ways to accomplish the same things -- and sometimes only the >things that certain apps do trigger bugs in drivers. But WHICH driver could it possibly be in the case of firefox? >As a simple example, you might have a program which does lots of >concurrent file access on multiple threads which triggers a problem in >a filesystem driver which isn't protecting its shared data properly. >A weird, and completely rule (happened to several people), example I >know if is where people copying data with one program found their >files were corrupted. People blamed the program at first but on >investigation it turned out to be the system bus drivers. The reason >one program resulted in corrupt data but others didn't is because that >program had a progress dialog which had a lot more information in it >and the extra GDI calls to update the dialog were causing enough bus >traffic that it triggered a bug where the bus dropped data destined >for the IDE controller. People upgraded their motherboard drivers and >the problem went away. -- 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: Stefan Kuhr on 23 Dec 2009 14:29 Tanix, On 12/23/2009 2:27 PM, tanix wrote: > <snip> > Btw, a while back I glanced over one article where ms came up with > new "model" for the driver. It was something to the extent that > you don't have to worry bout writing all this nasty kernel mode > code. You can pretty much stay on the user level and write it all > on a much higher level. > > Did not have much time to look into it or what does it mean. > > But is it true and what is the scoop on that? > AFAIK, it is currently for USB drivers only. -- S
From: Don Burn on 23 Dec 2009 14:37
Actually it is for a number of driver types, typically that use a protocol such as USB, 1394 or serial. It cannot work for all drivers, and has limitations, but it certainly is a good start. It will definitely reduce the problems that things like cheap USB toys which in the past have had drivers that caused millions of crashes on Christmas as kids plugged in the toys. -- Don Burn (MVP, Windows DKD) Windows Filesystem and Driver Consulting Website: http://www.windrvr.com Blog: http://msmvps.com/blogs/WinDrvr Remove StopSpam to reply "Stefan Kuhr" <kustt110(a)gmx.li> wrote in message news:uWJmJZAhKHA.5380(a)TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl... > Tanix, > > On 12/23/2009 2:27 PM, tanix wrote: >> <snip> >> Btw, a while back I glanced over one article where ms came up with >> new "model" for the driver. It was something to the extent that >> you don't have to worry bout writing all this nasty kernel mode >> code. You can pretty much stay on the user level and write it all >> on a much higher level. >> >> Did not have much time to look into it or what does it mean. >> >> But is it true and what is the scoop on that? >> > > > AFAIK, it is currently for USB drivers only. > > -- > S > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus > signature database 4713 (20091223) __________ > > The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. > > http://www.eset.com > > > __________ Information from ESET NOD32 Antivirus, version of virus signature database 4713 (20091223) __________ The message was checked by ESET NOD32 Antivirus. http://www.eset.com |