[Wine]old Wine from CVS

Mark Knecht markknecht at gmail.com
Sat Oct 30 10:16:59 CDT 2004

On Fri, 29 Oct 2004 20:43:50 -0700 (PDT), Walt Ogburn
<reuben at ugcs.caltech.edu> wrote:
> It turns out the scribbling is almost it!  The crash is not the scribbling
> itself, but the "char buf[JACK_THREAD_STACK_TOUCH];".  This is usually
> something huge.  If you make it smaller, the crash goes away - for me, the
> critical value is 14528 (OK), 14529 (crashes).  It seems that the end of
> buf is getting close to 0xC0000000 when the size of buf is 14528, and
> maybe something starts to go over.
> Now, I don't know anything about memory issues, so why is 0xC0000000 so
> important?
> If one of you who has tried compiling the doesn't-break-jack-fst version
> of wine cares to check, you might see which of the following possibilities
> is the case with the older wine: (1) buf doesn't get close to 0xC0000000;
> or (2) it does, but it's OK.  I just replaced the size of buf in
> libjack/client.c: jack_activate with 14528 by hand and put in a debugging
> message like
> printf ("buf: base = %p, size = %d, end = %p.\n", buf, size(buf), buf+sizeof(buf));
> (Of course, if you don't want a crash, you should also replace
> JACK_THREAD_STACK_TOUCH with 14528 in the scribbling code!)
> - Walter

Very interesting. Thanks! With this I can go back to the jack_fst
developers and get them involved more effectively.

I keep coming back to what Alexandre wrote in the memo part of the
Wine update that broke this:

Log message:
	Added support for managing reserved memory areas in libwine and ntdll.
	Try to reserve everything above 0x80000000 on startup.

Is it important because all memory above 0x8000000 is now reserved by Wine?

I'll add your print statements later this morning and report back what I find.


- Mark

More information about the wine-users mailing list