RtlTimeToSecondsSince1970 IRQL

Docs for RtlTimeToSecondsSince1970 say “IRQL: < DISPATCH LEVEL”.

Is this correct? If so, what is it doing that requires processing at <dispatch_level>
Thanks

James</dispatch_level>

James,

IIRC it is one of a group of functions in the RtlXXx set that are in
pageable memory.

Don Burn
Windows Filesystem and Driver Consulting
Website: http://www.windrvr.com
Blog: http://msmvps.com/blogs/WinDrvr

-----Original Message-----
From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of James Harper
Sent: Monday, September 30, 2013 6:21 PM
To: Windows System Software Devs Interest List
Subject: [ntdev] RtlTimeToSecondsSince1970 IRQL

Docs for RtlTimeToSecondsSince1970 say “IRQL: < DISPATCH LEVEL”.

Is this correct? If so, what is it doing that requires processing at
<dispatch_level>
Thanks

James


NTDEV is sponsored by OSR

Visit the list at: http://www.osronline.com/showlists.cfm?list=ntdev

OSR is HIRING!! See http://www.osr.com/careers

For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
http://www.osr.com/seminars

To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at
http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer</dispatch_level>

Magic? It doesn’t matter. All that matters is that it won’t work at
DISPATCH_LEVEL, which is what you need to know.
joe

Docs for RtlTimeToSecondsSince1970 say “IRQL: < DISPATCH LEVEL”.

Is this correct? If so, what is it doing that requires processing at
<dispatch_level>>
> Thanks
>
> James
>
> —
> NTDEV is sponsored by OSR
>
> Visit the list at: http://www.osronline.com/showlists.cfm?list=ntdev
>
> OSR is HIRING!! See http://www.osr.com/careers
>
> For our schedule of WDF, WDM, debugging and other seminars visit:
> http://www.osr.com/seminars
>
> To unsubscribe, visit the List Server section of OSR Online at
> http://www.osronline.com/page.cfm?name=ListServer
></dispatch_level>

> James,

IIRC it is one of a group of functions in the RtlXXx set that are in
pageable memory.

Ah. That makes sense.

Fortunately its functionality can be trivially replaced with a #define.

Thanks

James