[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       ms-smartcardddk
Subject:    Re: two IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_ABSENT requests??? Not too much?
From:       Etienne Deblois <edeblois () LABCAL ! COM>
Date:       1999-11-22 14:05:39
[Download RAW message or body]


Thanks a lot Vladimir for this information.

In the Hibenating mode Do the forction MyPower are call??? 

(DriverObject->MajorFunction[IRP_MJ_POWER] = MyPower)
(i.e: When this for are called? In my driver I never go in this
fonction???)

Best Ragard

----------------------
Etienne Deblois
Développeur Logiciel/Software Developper
Labcal.

400, boul. Lesage, bur. 300, 
Quebec  QC, G1K 8W1
Canada

T 418-692-3137 Post 611 F 418-692-1488
http://www.labcal.com



-----Original Message-----
From: Vladimir Beker [mailto:bwz@ARX.COM]
Sent: 16 novembre, 1999 07:04
To: SmartCardDDK@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Subject: Re: two IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_ABSENT requests??? Not too much?


To be honest, I don't remember the details. In tow words:
the trick was how to react when the comuter is hibernating and there is
pending IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_ABSENT or
IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_PRESENT request.
My handling of these requests was different:
in case of IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_PRESENT after restoring from hibenating I
finish the request only if smartcard was inserted
when computer was power down (which seems to be clear).
BUT: In case of IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_ABSENT after return from hibernating
I
finish the pending request REGARDLESS of
current card state. The reason (or at least what I see as logic of
Microsoft): smartcard might be removed and inserted again
when reader was powered off, so it is safer to threat the situation as
if
the card was removed.

Vladimir Beker
Project Leader
Algorithmic Research Ltd
[mailto:bwz@arx.com]
http://www.arx.com
Tel. +972-3-9279519
Fax. +972-3-9230864


-----Original Message-----
From: Etienne Deblois [mailto:edeblois@LABCAL.COM]
Sent: Tuesday, November 16, 1999 3:45 PM
To: SmartCardDDK@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM
Subject: two IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_ABSENT requests??? Not too much?


Hail all,

I have exacly the same bug.

Klaus, do you have any suggestion to fix the bug????

Vladimir, what do you do for pass the part E?????


Best Regard
----------------------
Etienne Deblois
Programmeur
Labcal.

400, boul. Lesage, bur. 300,
Quebec  QC, G1K 8W1
Canada

T 418-692-3137  F 418-692-1488
Poste 611
http://www.labcal.com



Vladimir,
please include the test log in your email. I will then be able to answer
your question.
Klaus U Schutz Microsoft
-----Original Message----- From: Vladimir Beker [mailto:bwz@ARX.COM]
Sent: Sunday, August 15, 1999 1:35 AM To:
SmartCardDDK@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM Subject: Re: [Q] two
IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_ABSENT requests??? Not too much?
Hello, Klaus
Yes, I did fail the test. I know that IFDTEST checks also for failure
cases (and I had several pleasant moments with this :-), but it is not
the case. IFDTEST marks me the fact that I return STATUS_IS_BUSY for
second IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_ABSENT request as FAILURE.
Vladimir Beker Project Leader Algorithmic Research Ltd
[mailto:bwz@arx.com] <http://www.arx.com> Tel. +972-3-9279566 Fax.
+972-3-9230864
-----Original Message----- From: Klaus Schutz (Exchange)
[mailto:kschutz@EXCHANGE.MICROSOFT.COM] Sent: Thursday, August 12, 1999
8:40 PM To: SmartCardDDK@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM Subject: Re: [Q] two
IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_ABSENT requests??? Not too much?
Vladimir,
did you fail the test or why do you ask this question? ifdtest does not
only check for success cases, it also checks for failure cases and if
the driver is able to handle them correctly.
Klaus U Schutz Microsoft
-----Original Message----- From: Vladimir Beker [mailto:bwz@ARX.COM]
Sent: Thursday, August 12, 1999 8:02 AM To:
SmartCardDDK@DISCUSS.MICROSOFT.COM Subject: [Q] two
IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_ABSENT requests??? Not too much?
Hello,
During the Part E of the IFDTEST (Power Management Test), the test sens
me IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_ABSENT request, which is answered by driver with
STATUS_PENDING. However after some time (after several
IOCTL_SMARTCARD_GET_STATE requests) it sends one more
IOCTL_SMARTCARD_IS_ABSENT, which is now failed by SMCLIB with return
code STATUS_DEVICE_BUSY (I think since SmartcardExtension knows to keep
only one NotificationIrp.
Is it bug in the IFDTEST? In the SMCLIB? Or I should handle multiple
IsAbsent/IsPresent requests by myself (i.e., keep the queue of pending
requests)?
Thanks
Vladimir Beker Project Leader Algorithmic Research Ltd
[mailto:bwz@arx.com] <http://www.arx.com> Tel. +972-3-9279566 Fax.
+972-3-9230864

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]