[interprocess] Please disable Win64 test until it works

Interprocess causes numerous "debug assertions" on Windows 64-bit platform. Since nobody is clicking on the dialog boxes and the process will only be killed by bjam after 5mins (necessary for some of the libraries), this results in unbearable long testing times. Please either 1. Disable tests on Win64 or 2. Change the CRT report mode not to show the diaglog box. Thanks, Sean

"Sean Huang" <huangsean@hotmail.com> wrote in message news:BAY143-DAV16F7E902C16F69CE8FDF74A3990@phx.gbl...
Interprocess causes numerous "debug assertions" on Windows 64-bit platform. Since nobody is clicking on the dialog boxes and the process will only be killed by bjam after 5mins (necessary for some of the libraries), this results in unbearable long testing times. Please either 1. Disable tests on Win64 or 2. Change the CRT report mode not to show the diaglog box.
Boost.Test deals with it as well. Genandiy

Sean Huang escribió:
Interprocess causes numerous "debug assertions" on Windows 64-bit platform. Since nobody is clicking on the dialog boxes and the process will only be killed by bjam after 5mins (necessary for some of the libraries), this results in unbearable long testing times. Please either 1. Disable tests on Win64 or 2. Change the CRT report mode not to show the diaglog box.
Which is(are) the name(s) of the toolset(s)? In the regression tests http://beta.boost.org/development/tests/trunk/developer/interprocess.html I can't find any 64 bit windows toolset.
Thanks,
Sean
Regards, Ion

-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost- bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Ion Gaztañaga Sent: Sunday, October 21, 2007 2:10 PM
Which is(are) the name(s) of the toolset(s)? In the regression tests
http://beta.boost.org/development/tests/trunk/developer/interprocess.ht ml
I can't find any 64 bit windows toolset.
The regression test report generation has been having problems for the last few days and many of the test results are disappeared. See my post to the testing mailing list. The failing toolsets: intel-vc8-win-10.0_x86_64/address-model=64/instruction-set=Nocona msvc-8.0_64/address-model=64/instruction-set=Nocona msvc-8.0_x86_64/address-model=64/instruction-set=Nocona Regards, Sean

Sean Huang escribió:
The failing toolsets: intel-vc8-win-10.0_x86_64/address-model=64/instruction-set=Nocona msvc-8.0_64/address-model=64/instruction-set=Nocona msvc-8.0_x86_64/address-model=64/instruction-set=Nocona
Marked as unusable for Interprocess. I'll need to install 64 bit Windows version to find out what's happening, but this might take some time...
Regards,
Sean
Regards, Ion

-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost- bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Ion Gaztañaga
Marked as unusable for Interprocess. I'll need to install 64 bit Windows version to find out what's happening, but this might take some time...
I'm not sure how this would solve my problem. If I understand you correctly, you only marked errors as expected but this does not prevent tests from running on Win64 systems. Regards, Sean

Sean Huang escribió:
-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost- bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Ion Gaztañaga
Marked as unusable for Interprocess. I'll need to install 64 bit Windows version to find out what's happening, but this might take some time...
I'm not sure how this would solve my problem. If I understand you correctly, you only marked errors as expected but this does not prevent tests from running on Win64 systems.
Sorry, I thought marking it as broken platform would stop running tests but I really don't know how I reach that conclusion ;-) While I manage to get access to a Win64 platform, can you give some hint on which assertions are failing? Regards, Ion

-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost- bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Ion Gaztañaga
While I manage to get access to a Win64 platform, can you give some hint on which assertions are failing?
Ion, Looks like this following code in mapped_region.hpp (line 237): if(!mhandle.is_shm){ //Update mapping size if the user does not specify it if(size == 0){ __int64 total_size; if(!winapi::get_file_size(detail::file_handle_from_mapping_handle(mappingge t_mapping_handle()), total_size)){ error_info err(winapi::get_last_error()); throw interprocess_exception(err); } if(total_size > (__int64)((std::size_t)(-1))){ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ error_info err(size_error); throw interprocess_exception(err); } size = static_cast<std::size_t>(total_size - offset); } Causes an exception to be thrown. There is an access violation during stack unwinding (unfortunately, I did not have time to track that down, you might want to force an exception in the 32-bit version to see the problem). Regards, Sean

Sean Huang escribió:
-----Original Message----- From: boost-bounces@lists.boost.org [mailto:boost- bounces@lists.boost.org] On Behalf Of Ion Gaztañaga
While I manage to get access to a Win64 platform, can you give some hint on which assertions are failing?
Ion, Looks like this following code in mapped_region.hpp (line 237):
Thanks for the info. I will look this issue. Regards, Ion

Sean Huang escribió:
if(total_size > (__int64)((std::size_t)(-1))){ ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ error_info err(size_error); throw interprocess_exception(err); } size = static_cast<std::size_t>(total_size - offset); }
Sometimes I must admit my code is *really* bad. The ugly castswill make that fail for 64 bit machines (where sizeof(std::size_t) == sizeof(__int64). I've committed a fix:: if(total_size > std::numeric_limits<std::size_t>::max()){ Let's see if things go better. Anyway, I'll continue to chatch the access violation. Regards, Ion

Sean Huang <huangsean@hotmail.com> wrote:
Interprocess causes numerous "debug assertions" on Windows 64-bit platform. Since nobody is clicking on the dialog boxes and the process will only be killed by bjam after 5mins (necessary for some of the libraries), this results in unbearable long testing times.
some time ago I posted fix designed specificaly to close such windows ... B.

Bronek Kozicki wrote:
Sean Huang <huangsean@hotmail.com> wrote:
Interprocess causes numerous "debug assertions" on Windows 64-bit platform. Since nobody is clicking on the dialog boxes and the process will only be killed by bjam after 5mins (necessary for some of the libraries), this results in unbearable long testing times.
some time ago I posted fix designed specificaly to close such windows ...
Which, AFAIR, I applied to bjam. Bronek, perhaps you could check the bjam code to make sure I didn't overlook something. Since I did rewrite the exec code not so long ago. -- -- Grafik - Don't Assume Anything -- Redshift Software, Inc. - http://redshift-software.com -- rrivera/acm.org - grafik/redshift-software.com -- 102708583/icq - grafikrobot/aim - grafikrobot/yahoo

Rene Rivera <grafikrobot@gmail.com> wrote:
Which, AFAIR, I applied to bjam. Bronek, perhaps you could check the bjam code to make sure I didn't overlook something. Since I did
oh well. It was not posted, my fault. See old mail I sent on May 28, 2007. There are two issues: the code to close these windows might be a little bit more reliable, but the main problem is with sessions (and fast user switching). Bjam might not have access to desktop where dialogs are being displayed if it is not running interactively. I created another program to handle this (should be run in all desktops, but is rather lightweight). B.
participants (5)
-
Bronek Kozicki
-
Gennadiy Rozental
-
Ion Gaztañaga
-
Rene Rivera
-
Sean Huang