winmm/tests: waveOutGetDevCaps called with invalid size
astrand at cendio.se
Wed Apr 23 01:44:55 CDT 2008
> > However, I still think it's VERY strange to expect success from an invalid
> > call. You are describing it as an "invalid argument" yourself. Why should we
> > expect a call with an "invalid argument" to succeed? And again, the test
> > does NOT pass on all Microsoft versions; it fails on Terminal Servers.
> If size wasn't relevant, it wouldn't be passed.
The size is used for determining which kind of WAVEOUTCAPS structure you
> There are only two options:
> only pass the number of bytes requested or return an error for unreasonable
> sizes. What is Terminal Server doing?
It's returning an error.
> > If the point is to verify that waveOutGetDevCaps doesn't write more than the
> > size supplied, this should be verified. I'd also like to point out that the
> > Wine implementation also doesn't handle this correctly: Only
> > waveOutGetDevCapsA does a memcpy() using the size argument;
> > waveOutGetDevCapsW does not.
> waveOutGetDevCapsW lets the driver do the copy (just like old versions of
> windows). The driver should be checking the size and only copying that much.
> If it doesn't, then it broken.
Any references for this claim?
You are saying that the driver "should only copy that much", but *what*
should it copy? In other words: If the size doesn't match the size of any
known structure (WAVEOUTCAPSA/WAVEOUTCAPSW/WAVEOUTCAPS2A/WAVEOUTCAPS2W),
should the driver then just *assume* some structure? Which one? As far as
I know, there's no guarantee that, for example, the first
sizeof(WAVEOUTCAPSW) bytes of WAVEOUTCAPSW are the same as WAVEOUTCAPS2W.
Peter Åstrand ThinLinc Chief Developer
Cendio AB http://www.cendio.se
Wallenbergs gata 4
583 30 Linköping Phone: +46-13-21 46 00
More information about the wine-devel