c# search in another process's memory - sudden lockout - c#

I need to keep track of another program's memory, constantly looking for a sequence of bytes to appear in there, and when they do, i need to remember their location so i later know where to write to.
I used the following post to learn how to look for byte[] in another process's memory:
C#: Search a byte[] array in another process's memory
My program is very simple: It launches process (using Process.Start), and then repeatedly runs function from the linked thread's one of the answers:
private static int GetMemoryAddressOfString(byte[] searchedBytes)
{
IntPtr hProcess = OpenProcess(ProcessAccessFlags.VMOperation | ProcessAccessFlags.VMRead | ProcessAccessFlags.VMWrite, false, Program.ArtemisProcess.Id);
if (hProcess == IntPtr.Zero)
throw new Win32Exception(Marshal.GetLastWin32Error());
int addr = 0;
int speed = 1024 * 64;
for (int j = 0x00400000; j < 0x11000000; j += speed)
{
byte[] bigMem = new byte[speed + searchedBytes.Length];
IntPtr unmanagedPointer = Marshal.AllocHGlobal(4);
ReadProcessMemory(hProcess, (IntPtr)j, bigMem, new UIntPtr((uint)(speed + searchedBytes.Length)), unmanagedPointer);
int result = Marshal.ReadInt32(unmanagedPointer);
Marshal.DestroyStructure(unmanagedPointer, typeof(int));
for (int k = 0; k < bigMem.Length - searchedBytes.Length; k++)
{
bool found = true;
for (int l = 0; l < searchedBytes.Length; l++)
{
if (bigMem[k + l] != searchedBytes[l])
{
found = false;
break;
}
}
if (found)
{
addr = k + j;
break;
}
}
if (addr != 0)
break;
}
return addr;
}
where ArtemisProcess is the Process i ran with .Start()
Most of the times, it works fine. As soon as i do the action in the watched process that puts the searched sequence of bytes to the memory, the next search finds it. However, sometimes, it wont.
I was wondering if i'm right and used Cheat Engine to be sure that the searched data IS there.
Then i added the part where i create an unmanaged pointer to know how many bytes there were read - and thats when i found out that exactly the place in the memory where the searched bytes appear (that Cheat Engine correctly identifies) returns 0! It wont let me read memory there. This "lockout" happens for about a minute or two, and only then it allows me to read the memory (just out of sudden, the next attempt to read the memory at that location is a success and the sequence of bytes is found all right).
Now, i read on the msdn that "he function fails if the requested read operation crosses into an area of the process that is inaccessible" but how do i know which part of the process memory is accessible and which isnt?
Why is Cheat Engine able to read that memory, and my program isnt?
Why does it suddenly allow me to read the process memory again?
I am at a loss here...

Related

PIC18 UART receiving corrupted bytes from PC

I seem to have issue to receive correct bytes from a PC to a PIC18F27J53.
The PIC UART is set standard, asynchronous, 8bits, 9600, No parity.
The PC is a win 10, I have made a simple UART program, and sending a few ints, all separated by commas, like the following.
"123,24,65,98,12,45,564,987,321,0,5.9,87,65,789,123,6554,213,8754\n"
I have tried different ways,
Tried to send each char one by one, however the PIC seems to get stuck midway or early in the transfer and the RX flag doesn't go high anymore.
I have tried to send each int followed by "\n" and my PIC to parse each chars and cut the read after a "\n" is found. This seems better, I can get more data in, but the final received data is corrupted: some ints are wrong etc.
It clearly show this is a sync issue, it looks like the PC is too fast for the PIC?
If so, I am looking at having a synchronous uart, however according to the web, this seems to be far from the chosen method, which makes me thing I must have another issue to resolve, in asynchronous mode?
My question, what is the most popular robust way to do that PIC to PC UART full duplex communication?
Here are my PIC receive APIs, fairly standard and simple (I think).
void int_receive_data(void)
{
char input_element[10] = { 0 };
char full_rx[128] = { 0 };
for (int i = 0; i < 22; i++) {
p18f47j53_uart2_read_text(input_element, sizeof(input_element));
strncat(full_rx, input_element, strlen(input_element));
strncat(full_rx, ",", 1);
}
}
void p18f47j53_uart2_read_text(char *output, uint8_t max_length)
{
uint8_t c;
char buffer[64] = { 0 };
for (uint8_t i = 0; i < max_length; i++) {
c = p18f47j53_uart2_receive_u8();
buffer[i] = c;
if ((c == 10) || (c == '\n')) {
buffer[i] = 0;
memcpy(output, buffer, i);
i = max_length;
}
}
}
uint8_t p18f47j53_uart2_receive_u8(void)
{
// wait for the flag
while (!PIR3bits.RC2IF);
// reset receiver if over run error
if (RCSTA2bits.OERR) {
RCSTA2bits.CREN = 0;
RCSTA2bits.CREN = 1;
return PIC_RC_FAIL;
}
// reset if frame error
if (RCSTA2bits.FERR) {
RCSTA2bits.SPEN = 0;
RCSTA2bits.SPEN = 1;
return PIC_RC_FAIL;
}
return RCREG2;
}
On the PC C# side, my sending looks like this
string[] full_separated = full_tx.Split(',');
foreach (string s in full_separated)
my_port.WriteLine(s);
The PIC is running from its internal clock 8MHz.
I never tried the synchronous way as it seems more complicated and 99 percent of the web result will show asynchronous way, which makes me think I better debug what I am doing.
Any idea? advice? Thanks
Well not really a solution, but an alternative. You should break the frame in small chunks. And if possible the receiver to ack with a char to notify the transmitter to go ahead with another chunk.
Reason I am saying that, I have a mikroE dev board with a similar PIC, and while running an "out of the box" example, and sending
"111,222,333,444,555,666,777,888,999"
It looks like the "999" is creating issues, too much byte, maybe buffer issue, maybe the not perfect baud rate mismatch builds up after a few bytes?
Repeat the sending every 50ms, 500ms or 1000ms doesn't make it better.
Changing the baud rate neither.
Only removing ",999" and it seems to work all right.
Without the ",999" I am guessing it is still on the "edge of working", so maybe just remove "666,777,888,999" and the communication should feel more comfortable.
More code, more traffic, but at least it works..

XAudio2 - Cracking output when using a dynamic buffer

To provide a little bit of context. I am trying to output live audio from a camera in my c# application. After doing some research it seems pretty obvious to do it in a c++ managed dll. I chose the XAudio2 api because it should be pretty easy to implement and use with dynamic audio content.
So the idea is to create the XAudio device in c++ with an empty buffer and push in the audio from the c# code side. The audio chunks are pushed every 50ms because I want to keep the latency as small as possible.
// SampleRate = 44100; Channels = 2; BitPerSample = 16;
var blockAlign = (Channels * BitsPerSample) / 8;
var avgBytesPerSecond = SampleRate * blockAlign;
var avgBytesPerMillisecond = avgBytesPerSecond / 1000;
var bufferSize = avgBytesPerMillisecond * Time;
_sampleBuffer = new byte[bufferSize];
Everytime the timer runs it gets the pointer of the audio buffer, reads the data from the audio, copies the data to the pointer and calls the PushAudio method.
I am also using a stopwatch to check how long the processing took and calculate the interval again for the timer to include the processing time.
private void PushAudioChunk(object sender, ElapsedEventArgs e)
{
unsafe
{
_pushAudioStopWatch.Reset();
_pushAudioStopWatch.Start();
var audioBufferPtr = Output.AudioCapturerBuffer();
FillBuffer(_sampleBuffer);
Marshal.Copy(_sampleBuffer, 0, (IntPtr)audioBufferPtr, _sampleBuffer.Length);
Output.PushAudio();
_pushTimer.Interval = Time - _pushAudioStopWatch.ElapsedMilliseconds;
_pushAudioStopWatch.Stop();
DIX.Log.WriteLine("Push audio took: {0}ms", _pushAudioStopWatch.ElapsedMilliseconds);
}
}
This is the implementation of the c++ part.
Regarding to the documentation on msdn I created a XAudio2 device and added the MasterVoice and SourceVoice. The buffer is empty at first because the c# part is responsible to push in the audio data.
namespace Audio
{
using namespace System;
template <class T> void SafeRelease(T **ppT)
{
if (*ppT)
{
(*ppT)->Release();
*ppT = NULL;
}
}
WAVEFORMATEXTENSIBLE wFormat;
XAUDIO2_BUFFER buffer = { 0 };
IXAudio2* pXAudio2 = NULL;
IXAudio2MasteringVoice* pMasterVoice = NULL;
IXAudio2SourceVoice* pSourceVoice = NULL;
WaveOut::WaveOut(int bufferSize)
{
audioBuffer = new Byte[bufferSize];
wFormat.Format.wFormatTag = WAVE_FORMAT_PCM;
wFormat.Format.nChannels = 2;
wFormat.Format.nSamplesPerSec = 44100;
wFormat.Format.wBitsPerSample = 16;
wFormat.Format.nBlockAlign = (wFormat.Format.nChannels * wFormat.Format.wBitsPerSample) / 8;
wFormat.Format.nAvgBytesPerSec = wFormat.Format.nSamplesPerSec * wFormat.Format.nBlockAlign;
wFormat.Format.cbSize = 0;
wFormat.SubFormat = KSDATAFORMAT_SUBTYPE_PCM;
HRESULT hr = XAudio2Create(&pXAudio2, 0, XAUDIO2_DEFAULT_PROCESSOR);
if (SUCCEEDED(hr))
{
hr = pXAudio2->CreateMasteringVoice(&pMasterVoice);
}
if (SUCCEEDED(hr))
{
hr = pXAudio2->CreateSourceVoice(&pSourceVoice, (WAVEFORMATEX*)&wFormat,
0, XAUDIO2_DEFAULT_FREQ_RATIO, NULL, NULL, NULL);
}
buffer.pAudioData = (BYTE*)audioBuffer;
buffer.AudioBytes = bufferSize;
buffer.Flags = 0;
if (SUCCEEDED(hr))
{
hr = pSourceVoice->Start(0);
}
}
WaveOut::~WaveOut()
{
}
WaveOut^ WaveOut::CreateWaveOut(int bufferSize)
{
return gcnew WaveOut(bufferSize);
}
uint8_t* WaveOut::AudioCapturerBuffer()
{
if (!audioBuffer)
{
throw gcnew Exception("Audio buffer is not initialized. Did you forget to set up the audio container?");
}
return (BYTE*)audioBuffer;
}
int WaveOut::PushAudio()
{
HRESULT hr = pSourceVoice->SubmitSourceBuffer(&buffer);
if (FAILED(hr))
{
return -1;
}
return 0;
}
}
The problem I am facing is that I always have some cracking in the output. I tried to increase the interval of the timer or increased the buffer size a bit. Everytime the same result.
What am I doing wrong?
Update:
I created 3 buffers the XAudio engine can go through. The cracking got away. The missing part now is to fill the buffers at the right time from the c# part to avoid buffers with the same data.
void Render(void* param)
{
std::vector<byte> audioBuffers[BUFFER_COUNT];
size_t currentBuffer = 0;
// Get the current state of the source voice
while (BackgroundThreadRunning && pSourceVoice)
{
if (pSourceVoice)
{
pSourceVoice->GetState(&state);
}
while (state.BuffersQueued < BUFFER_COUNT)
{
std::vector<byte> resultData;
resultData.resize(DATA_SIZE);
CopyMemory(&resultData[0], pAudioBuffer, DATA_SIZE);
// Retreive the next buffer to stream from MF Music Streamer
audioBuffers[currentBuffer] = resultData;
// Submit the new buffer
XAUDIO2_BUFFER buf = { 0 };
buf.AudioBytes = static_cast<UINT32>(audioBuffers[currentBuffer].size());
buf.pAudioData = &audioBuffers[currentBuffer][0];
pSourceVoice->SubmitSourceBuffer(&buf);
// Advance the buffer index
currentBuffer = ++currentBuffer % BUFFER_COUNT;
// Get the updated state
pSourceVoice->GetState(&state);
}
Sleep(30);
}
}
XAudio2 does not copy the source data buffer at the time you submit it via SubmitSourceBuffer. You must keep that data (which is in your application memory) valid, and the buffer allocated for the entire time that XAudio2 will need to read out of it to process the data. This is done for efficiency to avoid the need for an extra copy, but puts the multi-threaded burden of keeping the memory available until it's done playing on you. That also means you can't modify the playing buffer.
Your current code is just reusing the same buffer which is causing the popping as you change the data while it's play. You can solve this with having 2 or three buffers you rotate between. A XAudio2 Source Voice has status information you can use to determine when it's done playing a buffer, or you can register for explicit callbacks which tell you when the buffer is no longer being used.
See DirectX Tool Kit for Audio and classic XAudio2 samples for examples of using XAudio2.

OpenCL Cloo: Out of Resources Error

While running some test code in OpenCL (using Cloo C#), I started getting these OutOfResource errors from OpenCL and sometimes Unity just crashes entirely before I get an exception. I am basically re-calling a kernel function over and over with varying number of global/local work items to check timing. I leave the arguments the same and call the kernel starting with 2x2x2 global and 2x2x2 local and iterating uperwards checking only valid sizes. It works fine occasionally, but most of the time it completes about 30 or 40 Execute() calls and then crashes on the next Execute() call.
Note: Execute refers to the OpenCL.dll on the computer. The stack trace Unity returns is NULL I assume because of the native code.
Anyone have any idea what could be causing this?
Note: This version of Cloo is Cloo-Unity from GitHub and I am using it in Unity. The equivalent OpenCL function being called when I get the error is clEnqueueNDRangeKernel(), but it is called Execute() in Cloo.
Code Sample:
//Setup inputs one time...
foreach (var input in p_inputs)
{
inputs.Add(input.Function, input);
profiles.Add(input.Function, new RunProfile(input.Function, input.Weight));
input.Input.Prepare(package[input.Function]);
}
//Profile...
DateTime start;
int g_state = 0;
int l_state = 0;
long[] g = new long[3] { 2, 2, 2 };
long[] l = new long[3] { 2, 2, 2 };
while(g[0] * g[1] * g[2] < Device.MaxWorkGroupSize)
{
l[0] = 2; l[1] = 2; l[2] = 2; l_state = 0; //Reset locals
bool proceed = true;
while(proceed)
{
proceed = (l[0] != g[0] || l[1] != g[1] || l[2] != g[2]);
if (CLUtilities.ValidateExecutionParameters(Device, g, l))
{
Debug.Log("Profiling Start: " + g.ToEnumeratedString() + " / " + l.ToEnumeratedString());
foreach (var profile in profiles)
{
start = DateTime.Now;
//Exception here when on (g=6x4x4, l=6x4x4)
package.Execute(package[profile.Key], g, l);
package.Commands.Flush();
package.Commands.Finish();
float time = (float)(DateTime.Now - start).TotalMilliseconds;
profile.Value.AddRun(g, l, time);
}
Debug.Log("Profiling Ending: " + g.ToEnumeratedString() + " / " + l.ToEnumeratedString());
}
l[l_state] += 2;
l_state = (l_state == 2) ? 0 : l_state + 1;
}
g[g_state] += 2;
g_state = (g_state == 2) ? 0 : g_state + 1;
}
Sorry i cannot comment cause less than 50 rep. but which operating system do you use? gpu? driver?
i got similar problems caused by opencl.dll i used win10 and Nvidia (x64).
Also have a look on https://social.technet.microsoft.com/Forums/en-US/85680348-c2c4-40bc-9f39-9dcfeea331c0/windows-10-opencldll-error?forum=win10itprogeneral
It seems that there is/was a issue with the memory compression in win10.
My problem was caused by updating win7 to win10, without updating the nvidia drivers.
I just got back around to posting this, but the issue turned out be related to the fact that I didn't recall Kernel.SetArgument() each time I called the Execute() method. I originally did this because I was worried it would re-copy the buffer, but as it turns out the buffer copy doesn't occur in this method anyway (so the overhead was small anyway).
Does your nvidia graphics card for display?
If nvidia is main graphics card, you have to edit registry to turn off watchdog.
for windows 7
system/current/control/graphicsdriver
TdrLevel(DWORL) : 0

C# equivalent of C++ ostream::tellp for size limit on diskette

Is there a C# equivalent for StreamWriter of the C++ ostream::tellp? I am porting over some old C++ code to C#, but the client still wants to keep using diskettes (read: old equipment), so I need to find a way to find the file pointer position or to find how much I've written to disk already.
Below is the method that I've created so far:
private bool isDisketteBoundary(ref StreamWriter swOutput, int nCurrentDisketteNo) {
// Get current file pointer position
// long filePosition = nOStream.tellp(); <-- C++ code
long filePosition = 0; // <-- needs to change to find file pointer position
// Valid?
if(filePosition != -1) {
// Is the new size over a boundary?
float numDiskettes = (float)((float)filePosition / (float)Constants.DisketteSize);
int disketteCount = Convert.ToInt32(Math.Ceiling(numDiskettes));
// Is the diskette count larger than the current index?
return (nCurrentDisketteNo < disketteCount) ? true : false;
}
else {
throw new Exception("Unable to get file pointer from StreamWriter");
}
}
I think you are looking for
swOutput.BaseStream.Position
see MSDN: http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/system.io.stream.position.aspx .

Memory usage of strings (or any other objects) in .Net

I wrote this little test program:
using System;
namespace GCMemTest
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
System.GC.Collect();
System.Diagnostics.Process pmCurrentProcess = System.Diagnostics.Process.GetCurrentProcess();
long startBytes = pmCurrentProcess.PrivateMemorySize64;
double kbStart = (double)(startBytes) / 1024.0;
System.Console.WriteLine("Currently using " + kbStart + "KB.");
{
int size = 2000000;
string[] strings = new string[size];
for(int i = 0; i < size; i++)
{
strings[i] = "blabla" + i;
}
}
System.GC.Collect();
pmCurrentProcess = System.Diagnostics.Process.GetCurrentProcess();
long endBytes = pmCurrentProcess.PrivateMemorySize64;
double kbEnd = (double)(endBytes) / 1024.0;
System.Console.WriteLine("Currently using " + kbEnd + "KB.");
System.Console.WriteLine("Leaked " + (kbEnd - kbStart) + "KB.");
System.Console.ReadKey();
}
}
}
The output in Release build is:
Currently using 18800KB.
Currently using 118664KB.
Leaked 99864KB.
I assume that the GC.collect call will remove the allocated strings since they go out of scope, but it appears it does not. I do not understand nor can I find an explanation for it. Maybe anyone here?
Thanks,
Alex
You're looking at the private memory size - the managed heap will have expanded to accommodate the strings, but it won't release the memory back to the operating system when the strings are garbage collected. Instead, the managed heap will be bigger, but have lots of free space - so if you create more objects, it won't require the heap to expand.
If you want to look at the memory used within the managed heap, look at GC.GetTotalMemory. Note that due to the complexities of garbage collection, there's a certain amount of woolliness within all of this.
Indeed I used the private mem size because that's the one that's closest to the one in Process Explorer
if I rewrite the program with the GC.GetTotalMemory like this:
using System;
namespace GCMemTest
{
class Program
{
static void Main(string[] args)
{
System.GC.Collect();
long startBytes = System.GC.GetTotalMemory(true);
{
string[] strings = new string[2000000];
for (int i = 0; i < 2000000; i++)
{
strings[i] = "blabla" + i;
}
strings = null;
}
System.GC.Collect();
long endBytes = System.GC.GetTotalMemory(true);
double kbStart = (double)(startBytes) / 1024.0;
double kbEnd = (double)(endBytes) / 1024.0;
System.Console.WriteLine("Leaked " + (kbEnd - kbStart) + "KB.");
System.Console.ReadKey();
}
}
}
Then the output is:
Leaked 0KB.
Only when I have 'strings = null;' this is the case, remove it and I leak 100MB. This means that the local scope in the main routine does not cause the array to be freed. If I move that part into a static method Test, and call that one instead, I leak a few bytes. I guess what I should learn from this is that local scopes are ignored by the GC.

Categories

Resources