RE: I want to report the bug in "Windows 2000", this is a bug, I found

Tech-Archive recommends: Repair Windows Errors & Optimize Windows Performance

From: Johan (Johan_at_discussions.microsoft.com)
Date: 06/13/04 

Date: Sun, 13 Jun 2004 06:49:01 -0700

Thank you, now I know I don't have problem with my Computer, because there are far more users with same bug, I have same bug as you wrote, I'm hoping Microsoft will publish some patch for Win2k.
I think, its not "life or death" Bug, but its very annoying.

To C , man I don't know what is your problem, you should try to consult your shrink about your abusive manners, this is a place for Windows 2000 support, you don't have rights, to flame other people you don't like, or you are some kind of racialistic, because you saw some spelling errors.

Best Regards Johan
 
"Lucky" wrote:

> This problem is reported on 47 world major forums and its being
> recognize by 1288 people repotted it back to me-
> (I received insuperable amount of emails ,for just 2 days and my mail
> account and my internet connection is to slow to handle this huge
> amount of Windows 2000 users with this problem, I stopped that email
> and I stopped on 1288 received conformations from 1288 users I cant
> handle more emails, sorry but with this rate it easy can be 10000 or
> 10000 mails),
> -that they all got the same problem and When I talked with some
> Microsoft Technician, I phone them to inform Microsoft I found the Bug
> in Windows 2000, he told me "go to security forums ,give them your
> logs and if you are clear we can publish this BUG in knowledge base",
> I did that, everything is clear that this is a Bug in Windows 2000.
> Can I find someone here from Microsoft who is able to report this BUG
> to Microsoft knowledge base,
>
> here is brief explanation or some part of discussions from forums:
> Operating system is Windows 2000 pro ,server,adv. server with Service
> pack 4:
> -----------------------------------------------
>
> Strange things happen, because when I right click on taskbar section
> or on quick Launch section, Cpu time goes up to 10-30% for
> explorer.exe and if I do something like watching movie, I will get (if
> I do right click normally) pause for a second , or some kind of memory
> or CPU hog.
>
> If I constantly repeat this right click, on taskbar, I can watch cpu
> times goes like this, 1-2 clicks 20-30%, 3-4-5 clicks 60-70%, 6-7-8
> clicks gives me 90-99% and if I just continue to click on right mouse
> its constantly on 99% and its all on explorer.exe.
>
> Something utilize explorer.exe on right click but what ,where can I
> find section in registry which is responsible for right mouse clicks
> and right mouse button menu ore something for desktop ,Active X or God
> ask what. I don't know what to blame.
>
> Windows 2000 pro Sp4 ,Asus Motherboard p4p800, P4 2.4c, HT disabled,
> 1gb ddr, Gainward fx56000 with starstorm detonators 56.67 ex, Audigy 2
> NX with latest drivers , Intel chip set with latest driver.
> I did sfc check and I replaced all files suspicious by Windows
> protection , I reinstalled Service Pack 4 , I did reinstall NVIDIA
> detonators, I reinstalled Intel chipset driver , I reinstalled Direct
> X 9, I tried with IE6 repair process ,I tried with Office 2003
> reinstall or repair , I tried with registry cleaners......
>
> These pictures represents visual explanation of this Bug:
>
> http://loopdemack.spymac.net/Pictures/picture10.jpg
> http://loopdemack.spymac.net/Pictures/picture11.jpg
> http://loopdemack.spymac.net/Pictures/picture12.jpg
> http://loopdemack.spymac.net/Pictures/picture13.jpg
>
>
>
> Please, Microsoft look at this pictures.
>
>
> Constantly right clicking on the taskbar will raise explorer.exe CPU
> usage to 99% and hold it there for as long as you keep clicking - in
> fact, if you activate "Show kernel times" in the View menu, you will
> notice the vast majority of those 99% is spent at kernel level -
> according to taskman at least (once you activate that switch, times in
> the Performance tab will be shown as green for user level, or red for
> kernel level).
>
> Just wtf ring 0 code is doing showing a context sensitive menu on a
> supposed microkernel OS is beyond me... Well, not really, obviously if
> something's being done to hardware (i.e. showing the menu on screen),
> it'll have to go through kernel sooner or later (I just felt like
> criticising them a bit ). Anyway, this information (about the time
> being mostly kernel) may be important to report to MS, as it will
> probably help to pinpoint the problem - if CPU usage is indeed at ring
> 0 then it narrows it down a bit for them where to look at, it may be
> in the hardware access routines for example, or more likely something
> at userland is doing some improper calls of kernel-related APIs
> (LocalAlloc/LocalFree in cycle, for a simple unrelated example).
>
> Two notes: memory usage was not significantly altered throughout the
> test - explorer.exe did not consume any more memory while I was right
> clicking on the taskbar; and the explorer.exe CPU usage kept stable at
> 99% even after I had stopped right clicking, while the menu was still
> open. That is, repeatedly right clicking the taskbar raised CPU usage
> to 99%, and after it had reached that level, even without any more
> clicks, just by leaving the context menu open (i.e. not clicking
> anywhere else), CPU usage was still 99%. It only dropped back to 0%
> after I closed the menu.
>
> As a point of comparison, I tried right clicking somewhere else: I
> went to the Start Menu -> Run dialog box, and right clicked repeatedly
> on the text field (thus showing the Edit, Cut, Paste, blabla menu).
> CPU usage hardly ever got above 0%, the highest was 2%. Definetly
> something wrong here, I almost feel like taking out the debugger on
> this one...
>

Relevant Pages

  • Server Crash (2.6.17-1.2157)- BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#3!
    ... I just installed Fedora Core Kernel 2.6.17-1.2157_FC5smp and immediately got a "BUG: soft lockup detected on CPU#3!", I've never had this on any other kernel version before, but on my desk top PC and now this server with this specific kernel. ... isg-dev7 kernel: CPU: 3 ... kernel BUG at include/linux/list.h:185! ... MEM window: dd200000-dd3fffff ...
    (Fedora)
  • Re: Process.Start limit?
    ... Are there any limits to the number of processes started at the same time? ... But even fixing the "failed to dispose the Process object" bug that I had in my test program on the Process object returned by the Process.Startmethod) did not affect the behavior at all. ... Regardless of the bug, it's clear that the main issue with respect to the failure is some kind of _transient_ resource consumption issue, unrelated to the more general handle leaking that seems to be going on. ... Even if each process has only one thread, you can only create eight processes before they start fighting with each other over the CPU and reducing throughput. ...
    (microsoft.public.dotnet.languages.csharp)
  • Re: [BUG] 2.6.27-rc1 in ext3_find_entry
    ... disabling stream of BUGs in copy_page_c. ... So I'm now confident that this is triggered by suspend to ... Here's a truncated trace showing the suspend and the first BUG. ... Switched to high resolution mode on CPU 1 ...
    (Linux-Kernel)
  • Re: Why choose Kerio instead of ZA?
    ... bug fixed: parallel resolving of many addresses caused crash of GUI ... I just checked and KPF2 has one process using neglegible CPU ... I did notice that KPF4 is constantly reading and writing to the network via ... I browsed the Web using Windows Explorer. ...
    (comp.security.firewalls)
  • Re: possible CPU bug and request for Intel contacts
    ... Here are the details about CPU bug I mentioned in my previous post. ... kernel code and mapped user space pages overlap. ...
    (Linux-Kernel)