From f754465df341fd9d85ecb5a8367c0e81a7fbe8a6 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Aleksey Bragin Date: Mon, 11 Feb 2008 17:45:56 +0000 Subject: [PATCH] - Minor cleanup. See issue #3054 for more details. svn path=/trunk/; revision=32302 --- reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/anonmem.c | 7 ------- reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/procsup.c | 2 +- 2 files changed, 1 insertion(+), 8 deletions(-) diff --git a/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/anonmem.c b/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/anonmem.c index 28dbfd08ece..3129692f4c0 100644 --- a/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/anonmem.c +++ b/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/anonmem.c @@ -542,10 +542,6 @@ NtAllocateVirtualMemory(IN HANDLE ProcessHandle, * PAGE_EXECUTE_READ, PAGE_EXECUTE_READWRITE, PAGE_GUARD, * PAGE_NOACCESS * RETURNS: Status - * NOTES: Must run at IRQL PASSIVE_LEVEL? (or is APC_LEVEL cool too?) - * MSDN states that ZwAllocateVirtualMemory IRQL must be PASSIVE_LEVEL, - * but why wouldn't APC_LEVEL be valid (or is that only for the Zw* version - * and Nt* can indeed run at APC_LEVEL?) */ { PEPROCESS Process; @@ -561,10 +557,7 @@ NtAllocateVirtualMemory(IN HANDLE ProcessHandle, PHYSICAL_ADDRESS BoundaryAddressMultiple; KPROCESSOR_MODE PreviousMode; - // TMN: Someone Pick one of these. Until it's clear which - // level is allowed, I play it safe and check for <= APC_LEVEL PAGED_CODE(); -// ASSERT(KeGetCurrentIrql() == PASSIVE_LEVEL); DPRINT("NtAllocateVirtualMemory(*UBaseAddress %x, " "ZeroBits %d, *URegionSize %x, AllocationType %x, Protect %x)\n", diff --git a/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/procsup.c b/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/procsup.c index a15a60401a7..13c5eb53b0a 100644 --- a/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/procsup.c +++ b/reactos/ntoskrnl/mm/procsup.c @@ -636,7 +636,7 @@ MmInitializeProcessAddressSpace(IN PEPROCESS Process, szDest = Process->ImageFileName; lnFName = min(lnFName, sizeof(Process->ImageFileName) - 1); while (lnFName--) *szDest++ = (UCHAR)*szSrc++; - *szDest = UNICODE_NULL; + *szDest = ANSI_NULL; /* Check if caller wants an audit name */ if (AuditName)