Hardware Enumerator [pre-release]

[Siekmanski]

Hi Raistlin,

@ approximately 1 MHz ?

Cores/Packages ( should be 6 )
Threads/core ( should be 2 )

Physical RAM = 0 ?
Available RAM = 0 ?

Cache Line = 4196354 bytes ( should be 64 bytes )

L1 Instr Cache = 0 ( should be 32 KB x 6 )
L1 Data  Cache = 0 ( should be 32 KB x 6 )

[Raistlin]

Thanks Siekmanski, same corruption as AW.
That confirms it, I've got a HeapAlloc issue
somewhere. That or the PE compressor is
screwing around on the DLL.

Valuable input thanks man.

[Siekmanski]

These are also not correct on my COSMOS box,

Stepping = 4 ,not 0
Model = E ,not C00
Family = 6 ,not 2

[Raistlin]

Same issue, I allocate (HeapAlloc) OS Cores times APIC data
structure and a sorted linklist, which then overwrites SYSTEMSET .data? for 4 * Dword allocations, ending at
the L1 cache entries which you refer to. See SYSTEMSET STRUCT
in the sample.  :(
To fix, no idea why more than 2 cores
causes this issue yet.

[aw27]

The idea is that a program/process/application always runs within a user security context. The user being the one that executed it.
Some users might have restrictions applied to storage - for example a quota (max limit) on amount of logical free disk-space accessible.
Because the process/application shares the user security context - the application is also restricted by this amount of logical storage.
It would be of more interest for an application when trying to discover its environment, rather than physical storage.

Finally, I could translate what you are saying. The values refer to the partition size not to the physical disk itself.  :t

[zedd151]

Looks okay here.  8)

But again, I'm not sure what most of these values REALLY are supposed to be. But I believe 'stepping' and 'model' should not be zero. But they were also zero in the previous runs of the program - so I don't know for sure.

[Raistlin]

No its perfect Zedd151. I need to do
some serious debugging to understand
why a buffer-overflow is occurring. :(

[aw27]

If I were you I would publish the source code of the .dll
Nothing in there is secret. No need to hide it and use a compressor on top to hide more  .

[FORTRANS]

Hi,

I need to get this thing bulletproof - which is REALLY hard if you don't have access to a WIDE variety of platforms.

   I guess I should ask what type of systems you want data from.
I have some older systems if that is relevant.  Back to Windows 98.
And some not so old laptops, so probably limited capability.

Steve N.

[Raistlin]

Thanks FORTRANS - I will definitely PM you some test pieces.

@AW:

If I were you I would publish the source code of the .dll
Nothing in there is secret. No need to hide it and use a compressor on top to hide more

Currently the dll is part of a larger project, sponsored by the university and thus subject to ethics clearance.
I would need to request permission to publish the source. Perhaps end of the year.
- that's after the small bug is dealt with and I'am sure it runs stable. :t

[aw27]

It is all right then, but this sort of bugs are very easily debugged when we have the source.
It is also easy without source, but nobody will do it to help you. 
So, it is all in your hands. :t

[Raistlin]

Yes master  :( I shall endeavour to do better. Meaning
fixing the bug without freaking out too many ppl.

[aw27]

Yes master  :( I shall endeavour to do better. Meaning
fixing the bug without freaking out too many ppl.

I am sure you will make everybody here very happy with your upcoming fixed release.  :t

[Raistlin]

Dear Siekmanski, zedd151, Aw27 and you know who,
(& they thalts shalt not be named) THANK YOU so much.
Almost final release coming soon. Tommorow probably ...
You guys are the best, but you probabably know that
already! All bugs sorted and additional strange and
wonderful newish things will be revealed. ETA tommorow

[aw27]

That is great.  :t
Don't forget to tell us what sort of bug was that only appeared in some computers and not on others.