Ben
Mon May 12 08:43:24 CDT 2008
Pavel A. wrote:
> IMHO it would be nice to have "uniform" way to talk to services,
> whether they are kernel drivers or normal usermode services.
> Ioctls are only for kernel drivers.
> I'd like to be able to eventually move my stuff out of kernel (by same
> reasons as for moving drivers to UMDF),
> but keep same interface.
> If pipes are out, what else is left - maybe lpc?
A user-mode wrapper interface that hides the communication details perhaps.
>
> --PA
>
>
> "Don Burn" <burn@stopspam.windrvr.com> wrote in message
> news:e$XInUpsIHA.2064@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> I'm suspect it is the undocumented calls, once I saw the performance
>> I took the approach of when I see them in a driver, rip it out, why
>> bother with something that provides no benefit.
>>
>>
>> --
>> Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
>> Windows 2k/XP/2k3 Filesystem and Driver Consulting
>> Website:
http://www.windrvr.com
>> Blog:
http://msmvps.com/blogs/WinDrvr
>> Remove StopSpam to reply
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> "Pavel A." <pavel_a@NOwritemeNO.com> wrote in message
>> news:Oxvt9RpsIHA.4476@TK2MSFTNGP06.phx.gbl...
>>> Then, how these pipes manage to work between usermode processes?
>>> Is the problem only in (erroneous) use of undocumented calls?
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> --PA
>>>
>>> "Don Burn" <burn@stopspam.windrvr.com> wrote in message
>>> news:#LUfVxosIHA.524@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>> Kerem,
>>>>
>>>> I cannot spell them out, but having tried the samples that
>>>> have showed up on this, they all crash the system, either
>>>> immediately or with a system stress test. Then if you go look at
>>>> the undocumented calls, you start finding that they are not
>>>> accurately documented. Finally, even the ones that do work
>>>> (until stress) are very slow, so why bother? --
>>>> Don Burn (MVP, Windows DDK)
>>>> Windows 2k/XP/2k3 Filesystem and Driver Consulting
>>>> Website:
http://www.windrvr.com
>>>> Blog:
http://msmvps.com/blogs/WinDrvr
>>>> Remove StopSpam to reply
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> "Kerem Gümrükcü" <kareem114@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>>> news:uQEM2alsIHA.4848@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>>>> Hi Tim,
>>>>>
>>>>>> Too many special cases to handle.
>>>>>
>>>>> Can you tell some special cases that must be taken care of,
>>>>> please,... I did not use any kernel pipe stuff for inter driver
>>>>> communication yet. So what do we have to take care of or what
>>>>> special cases can someone expect,...?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards
>>>>>
>>>>> Kerem
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> -----------------------
>>>>> Beste Grüsse / Best regards / Votre bien devoue
>>>>> Kerem Gümrükcü
>>>>> Microsoft Live Space:
http://kerem-g.spaces.live.com/
>>>>> Latest Open-Source Projects:
http://entwicklung.junetz.de
>>>>> -----------------------
>>>>> "This reply is provided as is, without warranty express or
>>>>> implied." "Tim Roberts" <timr@probo.com> schrieb im Newsbeitrag
>>>>> news:2t6a24lpvicge63ripcjerbu9pjr3igssp@4ax.com...
>>>>>> mirage2k2 <mirage2k2@discussions.microsoft.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I have always performed I/O between user mode and kernel mode
>>>>>>> via traditional IOCTRL. I have seen examples where named pipes
>>>>>>> have been used. My understanding is that using named pipes is
>>>>>>> possible but non-standard and
>>>>>>> should be avoided. Any comments.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I agree with Maxim. I actually implemented a user/kernel pair
>>>>>> that used
>>>>>> named pipes, and in the end I tore it out and implemented an
>>>>>> ioctl scheme.
>>>>>> Too many special cases to handle.
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Tim Roberts, timr@probo.com
>>>>>> Providenza & Boekelheide, Inc.