Menu
Search

Forums

Forum Index

Thread overview
BetterC and Windows API calls
Jun 02, 2023
pineapple
Jun 02, 2023
bauss
Jun 03, 2023
pineapple
Jun 03, 2023
Dave P.
Jun 03, 2023
IGotD-
Jun 04, 2023
ryuukk_
June 02, 2023
Gravatar of pineapplePosted by pineappleReply
pineapple
Gravatar of pineapple


Reply

I've been experimenting a bit with betterC recently, and I've found that a trivial use of QueryPerformanceFrequency (the extern declaration imported from core.sys.windows.winbase) immediately crashes my program with status code 3221225477.

https://github.com/pineapplemachine/scamp.d/blob/master/src/scamp/time/monotonic.d#L76

What's going on here? The same code works as expected, without crashing, if I compile without -betterC.

Before this, I found that trying to use the core.sys.windows.winbase module's convenience overrides that accept a long pointer instead of a LARGE_INTEGER struct pointer would result in a linker error when compiling with -betterC.

Is there something I need to be doing differently to make Windows API calls, or is this a bug with betterC?

June 02, 2023
Gravatar of baussPosted by bauss
in reply to pineapple		Reply
bauss
Gravatar of bauss
Posted in reply to pineapple


Reply

On Friday, 2 June 2023 at 19:19:57 UTC, pineapple wrote:

>

I've been experimenting a bit with betterC recently, and I've found that a trivial use of QueryPerformanceFrequency (the extern declaration imported from core.sys.windows.winbase) immediately crashes my program with status code 3221225477.

https://github.com/pineapplemachine/scamp.d/blob/master/src/scamp/time/monotonic.d#L76

What's going on here? The same code works as expected, without crashing, if I compile without -betterC.

Before this, I found that trying to use the core.sys.windows.winbase module's convenience overrides that accept a long pointer instead of a LARGE_INTEGER struct pointer would result in a linker error when compiling with -betterC.

Is there something I need to be doing differently to make Windows API calls, or is this a bug with betterC?

If it works without -betterC and crashes when toggled on, then I'm going to assume it's either a bug or memory was corrupted before said call to QueryPerformanceFrequency.

Try to isolate the call and see if it crashes with nothing else.

June 02, 2023
Gravatar of Steven SchveighofferPosted by Steven Schveighoffer
in reply to pineapple		Reply
Steven Schveighoffer
Gravatar of Steven Schveighoffer
Posted in reply to pineapple


Reply

On 6/2/23 3:19 PM, pineapple wrote:

>

I've been experimenting a bit with betterC recently, and I've found that a trivial use of QueryPerformanceFrequency (the extern declaration imported from core.sys.windows.winbase) immediately crashes my program with status code 3221225477.

https://github.com/pineapplemachine/scamp.d/blob/master/src/scamp/time/monotonic.d#L76

What's going on here? The same code works as expected, without crashing, if I compile without -betterC.

Before this, I found that trying to use the core.sys.windows.winbase module's convenience overrides that accept a long pointer instead of a LARGE_INTEGER struct pointer would result in a linker error when compiling with -betterC.

Is there something I need to be doing differently to make Windows API calls, or is this a bug with betterC?

That error code is 0xC0000005, which is an access violation (segfault). Basically, a memory read/write error.

Using static in D means TLS. I'm not sure what the rules are for TLS and betterC, but perhaps it's not properly set up?

Maybe try __gshared instead of static? Not sure.

-Steve

June 03, 2023
Gravatar of pineapplePosted by pineapple
in reply to Steven Schveighoffer		Reply
pineapple
Gravatar of pineapple
Posted in reply to Steven Schveighoffer


Reply

On Friday, 2 June 2023 at 21:23:46 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

>

That error code is 0xC0000005, which is an access violation (segfault). Basically, a memory read/write error.

Using static in D means TLS. I'm not sure what the rules are for TLS and betterC, but perhaps it's not properly set up?

Maybe try __gshared instead of static? Not sure.

-Steve

Ahh, I had not even got around to considering that accessing the static declaration could be the problem. That seems like a bug?

Anyway, declaring it as either static shared or static __gshared fixes the crash - thanks for pointing me to that!

June 03, 2023
Gravatar of Dave P.Posted by Dave P.
in reply to pineapple		Reply
Dave P.
Gravatar of Dave P.
Posted in reply to pineapple


Reply

On Saturday, 3 June 2023 at 08:13:30 UTC, pineapple wrote:

>

On Friday, 2 June 2023 at 21:23:46 UTC, Steven Schveighoffer wrote:

>

That error code is 0xC0000005, which is an access violation (segfault). Basically, a memory read/write error.

Using static in D means TLS. I'm not sure what the rules are for TLS and betterC, but perhaps it's not properly set up?

Maybe try __gshared instead of static? Not sure.

-Steve

Ahh, I had not even got around to considering that accessing the static declaration could be the problem. That seems like a bug?

Anyway, declaring it as either static shared or static __gshared fixes the crash - thanks for pointing me to that!

Still file an issue though, TLS should either work or fail to compile, not crash at runtime.

June 03, 2023
Gravatar of IGotD-Posted by IGotD-
in reply to Dave P.		Reply
IGotD-
Gravatar of IGotD-
Posted in reply to Dave P.


Reply

On Saturday, 3 June 2023 at 16:39:54 UTC, Dave P. wrote:

>

Still file an issue though, TLS should either work or fail to compile, not crash at runtime.

No, it should still be possible to compile TLS into the binary because someone might have done a bespoke TLS implementation. We cannot block that possibility.

June 04, 2023
Gravatar of Richard (Rikki) Andrew CattermolePosted by Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole
in reply to Dave P.		Reply
Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole
Gravatar of Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole
Posted in reply to Dave P.


Reply
On 04/06/2023 4:39 AM, Dave P. wrote:
> Still file an issue though, TLS should either work or fail to compile, not crash at runtime.

Its a known issue, ryuuckk has ran into it.

It might be fixed as of 2.104, nobody has checked I think.

https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20737
June 04, 2023
Gravatar of ryuukk_Posted by ryuukk_
in reply to Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole		Reply
ryuukk_
Gravatar of ryuukk_
Posted in reply to Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole


Reply
On Saturday, 3 June 2023 at 17:27:48 UTC, Richard (Rikki) Andrew Cattermole wrote:
> On 04/06/2023 4:39 AM, Dave P. wrote:
>> Still file an issue though, TLS should either work or fail to compile, not crash at runtime.
>
> Its a known issue, ryuuckk has ran into it.
>
> It might be fixed as of 2.104, nobody has checked I think.
>
> https://issues.dlang.org/show_bug.cgi?id=20737

Yes it is fixed with 2.104 https://dlang.org/changelog/2.104.0.html