search for: waitformultipleobjects

...00e (C:\windows\system32\services.exe): Backtrace: =>0 0xb783942e (0x0043e5e8) 1 0x7bc75ca3 NTDLL_wait_for_multiple_objects+0x253() in ntdll (0x0043e818) 2 0x7bc75f93 NtWaitForMultipleObjects+0x63() in ntdll (0x0043e858) 3 0x7b868c76 WaitForMultipleObjectsEx+0xf6() in kernel32 (0x0043e9a8) 4 0x7ee2028f in rpcrt4 (+0x4028f) (0x0043ea08) 5 0x7ee17056 in rpcrt4 (+0x37056) (0x0043ea68) 6 0x7bc6ef74 call...

...450 +0a kernel32.dll Sleep 7c920412 +25 ntdll.dll RtlAcquirePebLock thread $2b0: <priority:15> 7c91df3a +0a ntdll.dll NtWaitForSingleObject 7c8025d5 +85 kernel32.dll WaitForSingleObjectEx 7c80253d +0d kernel32.dll WaitForSingleObject thread $4d0: <priority:15> 7c91df2a +0a ntdll.dll NtWaitForMultipleObjects 7c80956e +00 kernel32.dll WaitForMultipleObjectsEx 7c80a100 +13 kernel32.dll WaitForMultipleObjects thread $5ac: <priority:15> 7c91df2a +0a ntdll.dll NtWaitForMultipleObjects 7c80956e +00 kernel32.dll WaitForMultipleObjectsEx 7c80a100 +13 kernel32.dll WaitForMultipleObjects thread $4c8: &lt...

OK, I set up a new PC with a fresh XP load to be my rsync server. Rsync by itself seems to work fine (thank God. I'm going nuts.) I am still having problems when I throw ssh into the mix. At least now, things don't crash, but they do hang. The file list gets build, the transfer starts and it gets through maybe a few hundred files, but then everything stops. All the processes are still

Is anyone working on a Winsock2 port of openssh? ________________________________________________________________________ Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com

Dear I am very new to tinc and would like to ask any advice regarding tinc's throughput. I have been using OpenVPN for several years and found tinc as a simpler/scaler VPN using TUN/TAP device. I have tried to use tinc on WindowsXP and measured throughput in contrast to OpenVPN. My test revealed that tinc is faster in PING response (almost half of OpenVPN). However, when I tested with

...RD dwWait; static HANDLE *handles = NULL; int i,len = RARRAY(arr)->len; if(len==0){ rb_raise(cIpcError,"No objects to wait for"); } REALLOC_N(handles,HANDLE,len); for(i=0; i<len; i++) { handles[i] = (HANDLE)NUM2UINT(RARRAY(arr)->ptr[i]); } dwWait = WaitForMultipleObjects(len,handles,fWaitAll,dwTimeOut); // Yield block if signalled and block is provided if((dwWait >= WAIT_OBJECT_0) && (dwWait < WAIT_OBJECT_0 + len)){ if(rb_block_given_p()){ rb_yield(klass); } return INT2NUM(dwWait - WAIT_OBJECT_0 + 1); // signalled } if((d...

...ildd/wine1.3-1.4/dlls/ntdll/sync.c:807] in ntdll (0x00a4e598) 3 0x7bc79e6b NTDLL_wait_for_multiple_objects+0x23a(count=0x1, handles=0xa4e820, flags=0x4, timeout=(nil), signal_object=<is not available>) [/build/buildd/wine1.3-1.4/dlls/ntdll/sync.c:1122] in ntdll (0x00a4e7b8) 4 0x7bc79f6b NtWaitForMultipleObjects+0x5a(count=0x1, handles=0xa4e820, wait_all=0, alertable=0, timeout=(nil)) [/build/buildd/wine1.3-1.4/dlls/ntdll/sync.c:1160] in ntdll (0x00a4e7e8) 5 0x7bc79fbc NtWaitForSingleObject+0x3b(handle=0x8c, alertable=0, timeout=(nil)) [/build/buildd/wine1.3-1.4/dlls/ntdll/sync.c:1169] in ntdll (0x00a4e8...

...emantics of the operations to the optimizer, to allow > redundant lock removal, etc. Right. > > Note that #2 isn't even strictly necessary either. It's perfectly > reasonable to look for "pthread_mutex_lock" and do optimizations. Perhaps, but what if its "WaitForMultipleObjects" as in Win32. Point 2 becomes important in the face of point 1 (platform independence). You don't want to have to write multi-threading optimizations for every platform on which LLVM runs. If the concept (mutex lock) is supported by an extension and that extension also contains all the opt...

...fer; }; //fim cronometro int main(int a, char **b) { int i; DWORD iThreadId; HANDLE mainThread[num_th]; tfim = 0; tini = GetTickCount(); for(i=0; i< num_th;i++) mainThread[i] = CreateThread(NULL, 0, (LPTHREAD_START_ROUTINE)thread_call, (LPVOID)TESTE, 0, (DWORD *)&iThreadId); //WaitForMultipleObjects( num_th, (const HANDLE* )mainThread, TRUE, INFINITE); for( i=0; i < num_th; i++) { WaitForSingleObject( mainThread[i], INFINITE ); CloseHandle(mainThread[i]); } tfim = GetTickCount(); printf("\n chamou = %s",spenttime () ); return 0; } ////////////////////////// ;...

I was doing some testing with the 2.6.0-1 beta Windows installer and a Cyber Power CP1350PFCLCD UPS, and ran into an infinite loop in the usbhid-ups driver if the UPS is lost on the UPS bus. This is on a Windows XP SP3 system. USB device access is via libusb 1.2.4.0 (driver mode, not filter) in case that matters. Everything seems to work just fine so far while the UPS is connected (so kudos,

...d_to(self,rb_intern("service_main"))){ - rb_funcall(self,rb_intern("service_main"),0); - } + // wait for the Service_Main function to either start + // the service OR terminate - while(WaitForSingleObject(hStopEvent, 1000) != WAIT_OBJECT_0) + while((index = WaitForMultipleObjects(2, events, FALSE, 1000)) == WAIT_TIMEOUT) { } - // Close the event handle and the thread handle. - if(!CloseHandle(hStopEvent)){ - strcpy(error,ErrorDescription(GetLastError())); - ErrorStopService(); - rb_raise(cDaemonError,error); + if (index == WAIT_OBJECT_0)...

On Fri, 26 Mar 2004, Reid Spencer wrote: > Would people other than myself find it useful to have a standardized > extension framework for LLVM? I'm thinking of something that would allow > new LLVM instructions, fundamental types, structured types, etc. This > would require significant work to allow the various pieces of LLVM > (assembler, disassembler, runtime, JIT,

I was going to wait to bring this up but since the topic has been addressed ... Would people other than myself find it useful to have a standardized extension framework for LLVM? I'm thinking of something that would allow new LLVM instructions, fundamental types, structured types, etc. This would require significant work to allow the various pieces of LLVM (assembler, disassembler, runtime,

...annot be run in State Dump for Thread Id 0x44c eax=778321fe ebx=00000004 ecx=77db0260 edx=00000000 esi=77f8281e edi=00000004 eip=77f82829 esp=12bdfd24 ebp=12bdfd70 iopl=0 nv up ei pl zr na po nc cs=001b ss=0023 ds=0023 es=0023 fs=0038 gs=0000 efl=00000246 function: NtWaitForMultipleObjects 77f8281e b8e9000000 mov eax,0xe9 77f82823 8d542404 lea edx,[esp+0x4] ss:13a8d2f7=???????? 77f82827 cd2e int 2e 77f82829 c21400 ret 0x14 *----> Stack Back Trace <----* FramePtr ReturnAd Param#1 Para...

...l ---------------------------------------- Stack Trace (Using DBGHELP.DLL) ---------------------------------------- Showing 14/14 threads... --- Thread ID: 5532 --- 7BC71F15 ntdll.dll NTDLL_wait_for_multiple_objects+629 (0x00000003,0x7A79368C,0x00000004,0x00000000) 7BC72212 ntdll.dll NtWaitForMultipleObjects+98 (0x00000003,0x7A79368C,0x00000000,0x00000000) 7B890682 KERNEL32.dll WaitForMultipleObjectsEx+258 (0x00000003,0x7A793804,0x00000000,0xFFFFFFFF) 7E0E52FB winex11.drv X11DRV_MsgWaitForMultipleObjectsEx+187 (0x00000003,0x7A793804,0xFFFFFFFF,0x00000000) 7ED0C205 user32.dll MsgWaitForMultipleObject...

...gt; ---------------------------------------- Stack Trace (Using DBGHELP.DLL) ---------------------------------------- Showing 17/17 threads... --- Thread ID: 39 --- 7BC72195 ntdll.dll NTDLL_wait_for_multiple_objects+629 (0x00000001,0x0AE1EA50,0x00000004,0x0AE1EA90) 7BC72492 ntdll.dll NtWaitForMultipleObjects+98 (0x00000001,0x0AE1EA50,0x00000000,0x00000000) 7BC724EC ntdll.dll NtWaitForSingleObject+60 (0x000021D8,0x00000000,0x0AE1EA90,0x00000000) 7BC77A25 ntdll.dll <unknown symbol>+0 (0x00000000,0x7FF94F10,0x0AE1EB88,0x7BC6BBA0) 7BC6B998 ntdll.dll call_thread_func+12 (0x7BC778E0,0x00000000...

Dear all: I have found a big bug on xen concerning time virtualization. Please let me show you the whole process: 1 Phenomenon when I run a JVM based program in IE browser in my Virtual Machine, I have found clearly that time at the right bottom corner in my VM gets more slower and slower. I studied the bug deeply, and found something below. 2 Xen vmx_vmexit_handler --> ......... -->

...slation. Jacek Caban (4): jscript: Don't copy more than needed in parse_identifier. mshtml: Wine Gecko 1.3 release. oleaut32: Correctly test VARIANT_BOOL value in VarCat. mshtml: Get rid of no longer useful get_nsdoc_window helper. J?rg H?hle (5): kernel32/tests: WaitForMultipleObjects returns lowest signaled handle first. winealsa.drv: Fix AudioRenderClient write pointer calculation. wineoss.drv: Fix AudioRenderClient write pointer calculation. mmdevapi: After GetBuffer, refuse Reset, but Start/Stop is ok. winealsa: Pulse knows handle_underrun only since...

...----- > Stack Trace (Using DBGHELP.DLL) > ---------------------------------------- > > Showing 19/19 threads... > > --- Thread ID: 53 --- > 7BC78EDB ntdll.dll NTDLL_wait_for_multiple_objects+571 (0x00000003,0x00000004,0x00000000,0x00000000) > 7BC78FF9 ntdll.dll NtWaitForMultipleObjects+105 (0x00000003,0x00000000,0x00000000,0x00000000) > 7B866342 KERNEL32.dll WaitForMultipleObjectsEx+274 (0x00000003,0x00000000,0x00000000,0x00000000) > 7DEBEE02 winex11.drv X11DRV_MsgWaitForMultipleObjectsEx+194 (0x00000003,0xFFFFFFFF,0x00000000,0x0AECE898) > 7E974A18 user32.dll <unkn...

if this is a doublepost please sorry bur the first post was blocked by spamfilter because of wrong timesettings on my local computer. i reaplyed to my original post and now im not shure if the mailserver thinks the message is corrupt because of reply to a non existing message. here is the originalmessage (again?) Hi everyone, thirst of all please forgive my bad english :) i have installed wine