Sender:	rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk
Message-ID:	<3EA43D71.F34E91EC@phekda.freeserve.co.uk>
Date:	Mon, 21 Apr 2003 19:50:25 +0100
From:	Richard Dawe <rich AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk>
X-Mailer:	Mozilla 4.77 [en] (X11; U; Linux 2.2.23 i586)
X-Accept-Language:	de,fr
MIME-Version:	1.0
To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com
Subject:	Re: fstat, fd_props and inventing inodes, revision 3 [PATCH]
References:	<E196rAk-0007Mp-00 AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <003101c30704$8dbb1ea0$0100a8c0 AT acp42g> <000a01c30708$aacbc680$0100a8c0 AT acp42g> <3EA2685E DOT 725043BC AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <8296-Sun20Apr2003135633+0300-eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il> <3EA2B7E2 DOT E83694EA AT phekda DOT freeserve DOT co DOT uk> <1858-Sun20Apr2003203205+0300-eliz AT elta DOT co DOT il>
Reply-To:	djgpp-workers AT delorie DOT com

Hello.

Eli Zaretskii wrote:
[snip]
> Hmm, I wonder whether all DOS versions we support have support for
> 5F46h.  RBIL seems to imply some enhanced LAN software should be
> installed:
> 
>     --------N-215F46-----------------------------
>     INT 21 u - LAN Manager Enhanced DOS - LOCAL NetUseEnum

It works fine under Windows '95, '98, 2000/XP (whichever Andrew is using). I
expect it works under Windows NT 4 - after all, that was a "replacement" for
LAN Manager. I expect it to work under Windows ME too.

So I don't think we need to worry!

> > That seems a bit odd, when there is a status field in
> > the use_info_1 structure (which I called "share_info" in the code).
> 
> I don't see a reason why it should return any info about unavailable
> resources.  If a drive is unavailable, it simply doesn't exist, as far
> as any program is concerned; you cannot refer to it without hitting
> Int 24h.

True.

> Btw, do we have any info on how long does it take for 5F46h to do its
> job on a typical system?

Not very long! I add a one million iteration for loop executing
get_shares_internal (which calls Int 21h/5F46h) to the test program for
profiling. On my Athlon 850MHz running Windows '98 SE it sometimes took:

6.06 seconds for 1,000,001 calls to get_shares_internal with 1 share mapped
12.56 seconds for 1,000,001 calls to get_shares_internal with 2 shares mapped
16.50 seconds for 1,000,001 calls to get_shares_internal with 4 shares mapped

(The extra call to get_shares_internal is from the call to
__get_drive_mappings.)

Other times it the times were spread over 1.5s - 2.5s, 6s-7.5s. Anyway, even
worst-case it's not very long - < 20 microseconds.

Thanks, bye, Rich =]

-- 
Richard Dawe [ http://www.phekda.freeserve.co.uk/richdawe/ ]

- Raw text -