MCA_EXCEPTION structure

OSR_Community_User · August 29, 2005, 3:30pm

Jason,

Any rationale to not including this data type (MCA_EXCEPTION) in the
public OS symbols? It is listed in the DDK (inc\ddk\wnet\mce.h) so the
structure isn’t exactly secret. And while I generally don’t grumble too
much (like when debugging my own code) about symbols IN the DDK that
aren’t part of the published symbols, I’m trying to debug a stock system
exhibiting a machine check (presumably bad memory somewhere).

So, assuming that the reason it isn’t there is because nobody has asked
for it, consider this a request to add it!

Thanks,

Tony

Tony Mason

Consulting Partner

OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.

http://www.osr.com http:</http:>

OSR_Community_User · August 29, 2005, 4:07pm

Went ahead and added it to the Vista symbols. Unfortunately, it will be
tough to add this to the downlevel OS symbols, as there is an approval
process and it won’t hit the bar (there aren’t any widely-used debugger
extensions which require this symbol to function properly).

Jason

From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Tony Mason
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 12:29 PM
To: Kernel Debugging Interest List
Subject: [windbg] MCA_EXCEPTION structure

Jason,

Any rationale to not including this data type (MCA_EXCEPTION) in the
public OS symbols? It is listed in the DDK (inc\ddk\wnet\mce.h) so the
structure isn’t exactly secret. And while I generally don’t grumble too
much (like when debugging my own code) about symbols IN the DDK that
aren’t part of the published symbols, I’m trying to debug a stock system
exhibiting a machine check (presumably bad memory somewhere).

So, assuming that the reason it isn’t there is because nobody has asked
for it, consider this a request to add it!

Thanks,

Tony

Tony Mason

Consulting Partner

OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.

http://www.osr.com http:</http:>

You are currently subscribed to windbg as: unknown lmsubst tag argument:
‘’
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com

OSR_Community_User · August 29, 2005, 4:32pm

You mean there are still people actually using something before Vista?

Thanks very much. Obviously not a big deal (it’s good for the soul to
sit and manually pick through memory in any case).

Regards,

Tony

Tony Mason

Consulting Partner

OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.

http://www.osr.com http:</http:>

From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Jason Shay
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 4:07 PM
To: Kernel Debugging Interest List
Subject: RE: [windbg] MCA_EXCEPTION structure

Went ahead and added it to the Vista symbols. Unfortunately, it will be
tough to add this to the downlevel OS symbols, as there is an approval
process and it won’t hit the bar (there aren’t any widely-used debugger
extensions which require this symbol to function properly).

Jason

From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Tony Mason
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 12:29 PM
To: Kernel Debugging Interest List
Subject: [windbg] MCA_EXCEPTION structure

Jason,

Any rationale to not including this data type (MCA_EXCEPTION) in the
public OS symbols? It is listed in the DDK (inc\ddk\wnet\mce.h) so the
structure isn’t exactly secret. And while I generally don’t grumble too
much (like when debugging my own code) about symbols IN the DDK that
aren’t part of the published symbols, I’m trying to debug a stock system
exhibiting a machine check (presumably bad memory somewhere).

So, assuming that the reason it isn’t there is because nobody has asked
for it, consider this a request to add it!

Thanks,

Tony

Tony Mason

Consulting Partner

OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.

http://www.osr.com http:</http:>

You are currently subscribed to windbg as: unknown lmsubst tag argument:
‘’
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com

OSR_Community_User · August 29, 2005, 4:35pm

Jason,

A tangential question: does the include/exclude process generally favor
features that are oriented towards software developers vs. system
developers? By system developers I mean people who debug
hardware-related issues on platforms that are still in development. MCA
features are a good example of something we are interested in, as are
some other undocumented but very useful extensions that I know of.

Is there any way to get a list or documentation on some of these more
esoteric features?

-Zach

From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Jason Shay
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 1:07 PM
To: Kernel Debugging Interest List
Subject: RE: [windbg] MCA_EXCEPTION structure

Went ahead and added it to the Vista symbols. Unfortunately, it will be
tough to add this to the downlevel OS symbols, as there is an approval
process and it won’t hit the bar (there aren’t any widely-used debugger
extensions which require this symbol to function properly).

Jason

From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Tony Mason
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 12:29 PM
To: Kernel Debugging Interest List
Subject: [windbg] MCA_EXCEPTION structure

Jason,

Any rationale to not including this data type (MCA_EXCEPTION) in the
public OS symbols? It is listed in the DDK (inc\ddk\wnet\mce.h) so the
structure isn’t exactly secret. And while I generally don’t grumble too
much (like when debugging my own code) about symbols IN the DDK that
aren’t part of the published symbols, I’m trying to debug a stock system
exhibiting a machine check (presumably bad memory somewhere).

So, assuming that the reason it isn’t there is because nobody has asked
for it, consider this a request to add it!

Thanks,

Tony

Tony Mason

Consulting Partner

OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.

http://www.osr.com http:</http:>

You are currently subscribed to windbg as: unknown lmsubst tag argument:
‘’
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com

OSR_Community_User · August 29, 2005, 4:58pm

The include/exclude process is more geared towards customer requests; if
you ask, you shall receive :-).

But more seriously - the debugger team owns the core debugger features
and extensions, and in many cases simply packages what other teams
request for us to make public. We try to keep up to date on what each
team adds to their extension dlls, but are not always up to date. This
leads to some “undocumented but very useful extensions”. In other
cases, we know of undocumented items but they just haven’t made it into
the docs yet.

That said, please let us know of the undocumented but very useful
extensions that you’re finding useful, and we can bump it up in the
queue.

Jason

From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Gray, Zachary C
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 1:35 PM
To: Kernel Debugging Interest List
Subject: RE: [windbg] MCA_EXCEPTION structure

Jason,

A tangential question: does the include/exclude process generally favor
features that are oriented towards software developers vs. system
developers? By system developers I mean people who debug
hardware-related issues on platforms that are still in development. MCA
features are a good example of something we are interested in, as are
some other undocumented but very useful extensions that I know of.

Is there any way to get a list or documentation on some of these more
esoteric features?

-Zach

From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Jason Shay
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 1:07 PM
To: Kernel Debugging Interest List
Subject: RE: [windbg] MCA_EXCEPTION structure

Went ahead and added it to the Vista symbols. Unfortunately, it will be
tough to add this to the downlevel OS symbols, as there is an approval
process and it won’t hit the bar (there aren’t any widely-used debugger
extensions which require this symbol to function properly).

Jason

From: xxxxx@lists.osr.com
[mailto:xxxxx@lists.osr.com] On Behalf Of Tony Mason
Sent: Monday, August 29, 2005 12:29 PM
To: Kernel Debugging Interest List
Subject: [windbg] MCA_EXCEPTION structure

Jason,

Any rationale to not including this data type (MCA_EXCEPTION) in the
public OS symbols? It is listed in the DDK (inc\ddk\wnet\mce.h) so the
structure isn’t exactly secret. And while I generally don’t grumble too
much (like when debugging my own code) about symbols IN the DDK that
aren’t part of the published symbols, I’m trying to debug a stock system
exhibiting a machine check (presumably bad memory somewhere).

So, assuming that the reason it isn’t there is because nobody has asked
for it, consider this a request to add it!

Thanks,

Tony

Tony Mason

Consulting Partner

OSR Open Systems Resources, Inc.

http://www.osr.com http:</http:>

You are currently subscribed to windbg as: unknown lmsubst tag argument:
‘’
To unsubscribe send a blank email to xxxxx@lists.osr.com