[Issue 3342] TLS on dynamically loaded DLLs fails on Windows earlier than Vista
https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=3342 Andrei Alexandrescu and...@erdani.com changed: What|Removed |Added Version|2.034 |D2 --
[Issue 3342] TLS on dynamically loaded DLLs fails on Windows earlier than Vista
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3342 Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au changed: What|Removed |Added Status|NEW |RESOLVED Resolution||FIXED --- Comment #5 from Don clugd...@yahoo.com.au 2010-04-09 19:36:55 PDT --- Fixed DMD2.042, documentation fixed in 2.043. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3342] TLS on dynamically loaded DLLs fails on Windows earlier than Vista
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3342 --- Comment #4 from Rainer Schuetze r.sagita...@gmx.de 2010-03-10 01:32:28 PST --- There is a detection whether _tls_index is set and the tls-data-array contains a valid pointer (thinking about it the latter might be flawed), so this should cover any situation where the OS did not setup TLS correctly (when loaded at process init time, TLS is correct on XP, too). Do you think, that an explicite version check is better? What about applications that are configured to pretend running under a different windows version? As much as I can see, the referenced code contains two things not in the patch: - it keeps track of used tls-indexes in a bitmap, but XP does not have this. That's why the patch prevents unloading of the DLL. - it uses ExReleaseRundownProtection before accessing some TEB data, but this seems to be an (undocumented) kernel function, and I think we should be safe with our operations as the nt-loader holds a lock that disallows reentrence into DllMain -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3342] TLS on dynamically loaded DLLs fails on Windows earlier than Vista
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3342 --- Comment #3 from Walter Bright bugzi...@digitalmars.com 2010-03-09 23:11:09 PST --- I've been looking at the patch, it's an impressive piece of work! But I'd like it to detect the Windows version, and not do anything if it is Vista or newer, as those systems don't have the TLS bug. If we don't do this check, since the patch relies on undocumented ntdll internals, D apps are vulnerable to breaking with Windows updates. Also, skywing has some code to deal with this at http://www.nynaeve.net/Code/VistaImplicitTls.cpp Can you check it to see if anything was missed? Thanks! -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
[Issue 3342] TLS on dynamically loaded DLLs fails on Windows earlier than Vista
http://d.puremagic.com/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=3342 Rainer Schuetze r.sagita...@gmx.de changed: What|Removed |Added CC||r.sagita...@gmx.de --- Comment #2 from Rainer Schuetze r.sagita...@gmx.de 2010-03-06 08:42:18 PST --- I've posted a patch for multi-threading support for DLLs here in bug #3885. This includes a fix for implicite TLS on XP. It needs to access some global data in ntdll.dll, and the way to get there is not really obvious, but seems to be valid for all the ntdll-versions I have found on my system: SP2, one inbetween and SP3. -- Configure issuemail: http://d.puremagic.com/issues/userprefs.cgi?tab=email --- You are receiving this mail because: ---
