[Bug 4436] Storage32 regression problem: ECAD app 'Easy-PC' is
unable to create new project/design
wine-bugs at winehq.org
Sun Feb 12 13:46:18 CST 2006
------- Additional Comments From J.A.Gow at furrybubble.co.uk 2006-12-02 13:46 -------
Hmm, I've been doing some digging in the ole32 source. The first thing I tried
is to remove the calls to AddRef for the parent object in the IStream
constructor and destructor. This fixes the app, i.e. it runs, as now the file is
closed when the IStorage object is deleted. However, it is not a viable fix as
now we leak IStream objects that never get deleted until the process is terminated.
I have a couple of proposals to mention: I don't mind writing some code but I'd
like some guidance in order not to go down the wrong path and waste time. Please
let me know what you think:
1) Each IStorage object maintains a list of 'active' IStream objects that are
opened/created and contained within this IStorage object. Upon deletion of the
IStorage, all child IStreams are also destroyed, thereby preventing the memory
leak. This part is easy (I have already coded and tested this) but the problem
occurs when a well-behaved app actually does destroy the IStream before the
IStorage. There needs to be some communication path between the IStream object
and the IStorage object during execution of the IStream object destructor in
order to remove the outgoing IStream from the IStorage's list of 'active'
IStreams. Problem is, (and here my lack of knowledge of the Windows COM stuff
hinders me) is that there is no published interface I can use. I could introduce
a private interface, but this would only work if an IStream could be guaranteed
only ever to be created as a child of an IStorage - this would break
encapsulation. The other way would be to introduce another interface to
IUnknown, so that IStream could call a method in its ancestor and the method
would be guaranteed to exist, but would only be effective for an IStorage ancestor.
2) This would use a list similar to (1), but the list would exist in process
global space outside the object hierarchy. As far as I can see this would bring
with it a whole slew of issues related to multithreaded access to the list. Or
would it? Is the ole32 API designed to be single-threaded? I am not sure, but if
it is not, what locks would I need to use to mutex access to the list?
The first option would be my first choice, providing a workaround to avoid
breakage of encapsulation can be found.
Configure bugmail: http://bugs.winehq.org/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the assignee for the bug, or are watching the assignee.
More information about the wine-bugs