Autocad 2004 STATUS_INVALID_LDT_OFFSET

[Jaap Stolk]

On 6/24/06, Vitaliy Margolen <wine-devel at kievinfo.com> wrote:
> You can ignore tag altogether. It's only enabled with a special registry key (on
> windows). And drivers have no way nor need to verify the tag. So I think you can
> just remove that trace. I will need to think something to stop of from crashing.
> Or try using wine_dbgstr_a((char*)&Tag) instead.

ok. I have not made a real patch, but but if it pops up again i may try that.

> PS: I wasn't sure if you were using my ntoskrnl implementation or not.
yes. I'm using: http://www.winehq.com/pipermail/wine-devel/2006-June/048583.html

> If you are then could you post somewhere +ntoskrnl trace? That might be helpful.
> Also it could be number of other things that this driver tries to do that ntoskrnl
> has not implementation for.
It seems to work ok with autocad 2004. I think the problems are more
in the safedisc itself.

I have the +all log: (16 MB)
$ grep -i ':ntoskrnl:' all_log.txt
163439:0009:trace:ntoskrnl:NTOSKRNL_connect Connecting to ntoskrnl
163444:0009:trace:ntoskrnl:NTOSKRNL_connect Trying to start ntoskrnl
178596:wine_dbg_vprintf: debugstr buffer overflow (contents:
'000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (0 20 ')
200646:0009:trace:ntoskrnl:NTOSKRNL_connect Connecting to ntoskrnl

I just noticed, after my "fix" the there are no ntoskrnl traces in the
+all log.
so my fix was preventing the error by crashing ntoskrnl :-(

here is the log after remofing the tag altogether:
(I had to ctrl-c wine, autocad did not shutdown by itself, so I think
things are improving.)

$ grep -i ':ntoskrnl:' all_log_no_tag.txt
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (1 16 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExFreePool (0x401fcc18)
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (1 94 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExFreePool (0x4020d220)
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (0 168 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (0 20 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (0 120 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:IoCreateDevice (0x4020d220, 0,
L"\\Device\\CdaC17BA", 51712, 0, 0, 0x407523a0)
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (0 24 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (0 184 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:IoCreateDevice Created device with handel 0x28
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:IoCreateSymbolicLink (L"\\DosDevices\\CdaC17BA" ->
L"\\Device\\CdaC17BA")
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (0 24 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (1 36 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:IoCreateDevice (0x4020d220, 0,
L"\\Device\\CdaC15BA", 61184, 0, 0, 0x40752140)
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (0 24 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (0 184 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:IoCreateDevice Created device with handel 0x34
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:IoCreateSymbolicLink (L"\\DosDevices\\CdaC15BA" ->
L"\\Device\\CdaC15BA")
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:ExAllocatePoolWithTag (0 24 <tag>), semi-stub
000f:trace:ntoskrnl:driver_control returned from call with status 00000000

does "semi-stub" mean that this call is not fully implemented ?

Jaap.