[PATCH 0/3] RFC: Implement MemoryWorkingSetExInformation.

Paul Gofman gofmanp at gmail.com
Thu Dec 19 03:01:21 CST 2019

On 12/19/19 00:28, Alexandre Julliard wrote:
> Andrew Wesie <awesie at gmail.com> writes:
>> If someone has an alternative approach, or there is appetite using the staging
>> stub in upstream Wine, that would be very welcome feedback.
> If the partial stub is enough to make the application happy, that's good
> enough for now. Adding a more correct but more expensive solution can
> wait until we find an app that requires it.
Just for consideration, I would like to point out that there is a set of
native API functions most of DRM / anticheats calling these days
(various NtQuery... functions at the first place). Many of their
information classes are not implemented or implemented as simplistic
stubs in various out of tree patches. Every time you test such a stuff
in the applications you hit a number of these stubs and always have to
suspect that this can have something to do with the problem. Sometimes
it is, often not. Sorting this out takes a lot of time. So even if there
is no application we currently know for sure depending on a correct
implementation, still having the correct implementation for (some more)
information classes would help greatly in this aspect. It seems to me
that NtQueryVirtualMemory() and NtQueryInformationProcess(...,
SystemModuleInformation / SystemModuleInformationEx) are currently the
top hits.

More information about the wine-devel mailing list