非常奇怪的段错误调用 WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult
Very strange segfault calling WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult
我有这个代码：
void GetResult(WINUSB_INTERFACE_HANDLE InterfaceHandle, LPOVERLAPPED lpOverlapped)
{
DWORD numBytes = 0;
WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult(
InterfaceHandle,
lpOverlapped,
&numBytes,
TRUE
);
return;
uint8_t stack[64];
}
WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult 是一个 __stdcall 函数声明如下：
WINBOOL WINAPI WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult (WINUSB_INTERFACE_HANDLE InterfaceHandle, LPOVERLAPPED lpOverlapped, LPDWORD lpNumberOfBytesTransferred, WINBOOL bWait);
使用 GCC 5.3.0 (MinGW) 在调试模式下编译一切正常。 （我无法使用 VC++ 进行编译，因为我使用的是 GCC 扩展。）
但是如果我把它改成stack[80]然后它就会出现段错误！！
这是每种情况下的反汇编。 64（不崩溃）：
Dump of assembler code for function GetResult(void*, _OVERLAPPED*):
88 {
0x00408523 <+0>: push %ebp
0x00408524 <+1>: mov %esp,%ebp
0x00408526 <+3>: sub [=13=]x68,%esp
89 DWORD numBytes = 0;
0x00408529 <+6>: movl [=13=]x0,-0xc(%ebp)
90 WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult(
91 InterfaceHandle,
92 lpOverlapped,
93 &numBytes,
94 TRUE
95 );
=> 0x00408530 <+13>: movl [=13=]x1,0xc(%esp)
0x00408538 <+21>: lea -0xc(%ebp),%eax
0x0040853b <+24>: mov %eax,0x8(%esp)
0x0040853f <+28>: mov 0xc(%ebp),%eax
0x00408542 <+31>: mov %eax,0x4(%esp)
0x00408546 <+35>: mov 0x8(%ebp),%eax
0x00408549 <+38>: mov %eax,(%esp)
0x0040854c <+41>: call 0x409d58 <WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult@16>
0x00408551 <+46>: sub [=13=]x10,%esp
96 return;
0x00408554 <+49>: nop
97
98 uint8_t stack[64];
99 }
0x00408555 <+50>: leave
0x00408556 <+51>: ret
和 80（不会崩溃）：
Dump of assembler code for function GetResult(void*, _OVERLAPPED*):
88 {
0x00408523 <+0>: push %ebp
0x00408524 <+1>: mov %esp,%ebp
0x00408526 <+3>: sub [=14=]x78,%esp
89 DWORD numBytes = 0;
0x00408529 <+6>: movl [=14=]x0,-0xc(%ebp)
90 WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult(
91 InterfaceHandle,
92 lpOverlapped,
93 &numBytes,
94 TRUE
95 );
=> 0x00408530 <+13>: movl [=14=]x1,0xc(%esp)
0x00408538 <+21>: lea -0xc(%ebp),%eax
0x0040853b <+24>: mov %eax,0x8(%esp)
0x0040853f <+28>: mov 0xc(%ebp),%eax
0x00408542 <+31>: mov %eax,0x4(%esp)
0x00408546 <+35>: mov 0x8(%ebp),%eax
0x00408549 <+38>: mov %eax,(%esp)
0x0040854c <+41>: call 0x409d58 <WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult@16>
0x00408551 <+46>: sub [=14=]x10,%esp
96 return;
0x00408554 <+49>: nop
97
98 uint8_t stack[80];
99 }
0x00408555 <+50>: leave
0x00408556 <+51>: ret
__stdcall 的作用是添加 sub [=20=]x10,%esp 行，我猜是为了取消函数中的 ret [=21=]x10。
无论如何，这些看起来非常相似，我不知道它为什么会崩溃。我什至不能 100% 确定 哪里 它崩溃了（GDB 相当无用）但它在 WinUsb 函数调用附近的某个地方。
很难调试，因为如果我 运行 调试器设置了任何断点，它就不会崩溃。我怀疑这可能与时间有关 -
我还可以通过一些额外的 Sleep(100)s 来防止崩溃。有一次它似乎在 PerfIncrementULongLongCounterValue() 崩溃了，但谁知道呢...
有人知道为什么会发生这种情况吗？
编辑
WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult() 只是根据它的程序集直接调用 GetOverlappedResult()，所以我用它替换了调用。现在你需要 stack[96] 来导致崩溃，但当它发生时它至少告诉我真正的崩溃在哪里（我认为）！
下面是GetOverlappedResult()的反汇编。它在指示的地方崩溃，因为 ebp 是 0.
0x76feaba0 8b ff mov %edi,%edi
0x76feaba2 <+0x0002> 55 push %ebp
0x76feaba3 <+0x0003> 8b ec mov %esp,%ebp
0x76feaba5 <+0x0005> 83 ec 0c sub [=15=]xc,%esp
0x76feaba8 <+0x0008> a1 94 4b 09 77 mov 0x77094b94,%eax
0x76feabad <+0x000d> 33 c5 xor %ebp,%eax
0x76feabaf <+0x000f> 89 45 fc mov %eax,-0x4(%ebp)
0x76feabb2 <+0x0012> 83 7d 14 00 cmpl [=15=]x0,0x14(%ebp)
0x76feabb6 <+0x0016> 53 push %ebx
0x76feabb7 <+0x0017> 56 push %esi
0x76feabb8 <+0x0018> 57 push %edi
0x76feabb9 <+0x0019> 0f 84 b3 00 00 00 je 0x76feac72 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+210>
0x76feabbf <+0x001f> 83 cf ff or [=15=]xffffffff,%edi
0x76feabc2 <+0x0022> 8b 5d 08 mov 0x8(%ebp),%ebx
0x76feabc5 <+0x0025> 83 cb 01 or [=15=]x1,%ebx
0x76feabc8 <+0x0028> 85 ff test %edi,%edi
0x76feabca <+0x002a> 0f 84 a9 00 00 00 je 0x76feac79 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+217>
0x76feabd0 <+0x0030> b8 01 00 00 00 mov [=15=]x1,%eax
0x76feabd5 <+0x0035> c7 45 f4 01 00 00 00 movl [=15=]x1,-0xc(%ebp)
0x76feabdc <+0x003c> 89 45 f8 mov %eax,-0x8(%ebp)
0x76feabdf <+0x003f> 84 d8 test %bl,%al
0x76feabe1 <+0x0041> 0f 84 5e f3 03 00 je 0x77029f45 <KERNELBASE!GetCurrentProcess+43221>
0x76feabe7 <+0x0047> 6a 00 push [=15=]x0
0x76feabe9 <+0x0049> 68 dc 10 f2 76 push [=15=]x76f210dc
0x76feabee <+0x004e> 50 push %eax
0x76feabef <+0x004f> 68 ab ab ab ab push [=15=]xabababab
0x76feabf4 <+0x0054> ff 15 68 80 09 77 call *0x77098068
0x76feabfa <+0x005a> 8b f0 mov %eax,%esi
0x76feabfc <+0x005c> 85 f6 test %esi,%esi
0x76feabfe <+0x005e> 74 0e je 0x76feac0e <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+110>
0x76feac00 <+0x0060> 8d 45 f4 lea -0xc(%ebp),%eax
0x76feac03 <+0x0063> 8b ce mov %esi,%ecx
0x76feac05 <+0x0065> 50 push %eax
0x76feac06 <+0x0066> ff 15 5c 8a 09 77 call *0x77098a5c
0x76feac0c <+0x006c> ff d6 call *%esi
0x76feac0e <+0x006e> 33 c0 xor %eax,%eax
0x76feac10 <+0x0070> 83 e3 fe and [=15=]xfffffffe,%ebx
0x76feac13 <+0x0073> 89 45 f8 mov %eax,-0x8(%ebp)
0x76feac16 <+0x0076> 39 45 f4 cmp %eax,-0xc(%ebp)
0x76feac19 <+0x0079> 0f 85 26 f3 03 00 jne 0x77029f45 <KERNELBASE!GetCurrentProcess+43221>
0x76feac1f <+0x007f> 8b 75 0c mov 0xc(%ebp),%esi
0x76feac22 <+0x0082> 81 3e 03 01 00 00 cmpl [=15=]x103,(%esi)
0x76feac28 <+0x0088> 74 26 je 0x76feac50 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+176>
Crash:
0x76feac2a <+0x008a> 8b 45 10 mov 0x10(%ebp),%eax
0x76feac2d <+0x008d> 8b 4e 04 mov 0x4(%esi),%ecx
0x76feac30 <+0x0090> 89 08 mov %ecx,(%eax)
0x76feac32 <+0x0092> 8b 0e mov (%esi),%ecx
0x76feac34 <+0x0094> 85 c9 test %ecx,%ecx
0x76feac36 <+0x0096> 78 31 js 0x76feac69 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+201>
0x76feac38 <+0x0098> b8 01 00 00 00 mov [=15=]x1,%eax
0x76feac3d <+0x009d> 8b 4d fc mov -0x4(%ebp),%ecx
0x76feac40 <+0x00a0> 5f pop %edi
0x76feac41 <+0x00a1> 5e pop %esi
0x76feac42 <+0x00a2> 33 cd xor %ebp,%ecx
0x76feac44 <+0x00a4> 5b pop %ebx
0x76feac45 <+0x00a5> e8 0b f0 02 00 call 0x77019c55 <PerfIncrementULongLongCounterValue+197>
0x76feac4a <+0x00aa> 8b e5 mov %ebp,%esp
0x76feac4c <+0x00ac> 5d pop %ebp
0x76feac4d <+0x00ad> c2 10 00 ret [=15=]x10
0x76feac50 <+0x00b0> 8b 46 10 mov 0x10(%esi),%eax
0x76feac53 <+0x00b3> 85 c0 test %eax,%eax
0x76feac55 <+0x00b5> 74 46 je 0x76feac9d <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+253>
0x76feac57 <+0x00b7> 6a 00 push [=15=]x0
0x76feac59 <+0x00b9> 57 push %edi
0x76feac5a <+0x00ba> 50 push %eax
0x76feac5b <+0x00bb> e8 50 01 00 00 call 0x76feadb0 <WaitForSingleObjectEx>
0x76feac60 <+0x00c0> 85 c0 test %eax,%eax
0x76feac62 <+0x00c2> 74 c6 je 0x76feac2a <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+138>
0x76feac64 <+0x00c4> e9 fb f2 03 00 jmp 0x77029f64 <KERNELBASE!GetCurrentProcess+43252>
0x76feac69 <+0x00c9> e8 d2 f1 ff ff call 0x76fe9e40 <OpenThreadToken+64>
0x76feac6e <+0x00ce> 33 c0 xor %eax,%eax
0x76feac70 <+0x00d0> eb cb jmp 0x76feac3d <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+157>
0x76feac72 <+0x00d2> 33 ff xor %edi,%edi
0x76feac74 <+0x00d4> e9 49 ff ff ff jmp 0x76feabc2 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+34>
0x76feac79 <+0x00d9> 8b 75 0c mov 0xc(%ebp),%esi
0x76feac7c <+0x00dc> 81 3e 03 01 00 00 cmpl [=15=]x103,(%esi)
0x76feac82 <+0x00e2> 74 0a je 0x76feac8e <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+238>
0x76feac84 <+0x00e4> 33 c9 xor %ecx,%ecx
0x76feac86 <+0x00e6> 8d 45 f8 lea -0x8(%ebp),%eax
0x76feac89 <+0x00e9> f0 09 08 lock or %ecx,(%eax)
0x76feac8c <+0x00ec> eb 9c jmp 0x76feac2a <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+138>
0x76feac8e <+0x00ee> 68 e4 03 00 00 push [=15=]x3e4
0x76feac93 <+0x00f3> ff 15 c4 80 09 77 call *0x770980c4
0x76feac99 <+0x00f9> 33 c0 xor %eax,%eax
0x76feac9b <+0x00fb> eb a0 jmp 0x76feac3d <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+157>
0x76feac9d <+0x00fd> 8b c3 mov %ebx,%eax
0x76feac9f <+0x00ff> eb b6 jmp 0x76feac57 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+183>
0x76feaca1 <+0x0101> cc int3
0x76feaca2 <+0x0102> cc int3
0x76feaca3 <+0x0103> cc int3
0x76feaca4 <+0x0104> cc int3
0x76feaca5 <+0x0105> cc int3
0x76feaca6 <+0x0106> cc int3
0x76feaca7 <+0x0107> cc int3
0x76feaca8 <+0x0108> cc int3
0x76feaca9 <+0x0109> cc int3
0x76feacaa <+0x010a> cc int3
0x76feacab <+0x010b> cc int3
0x76feacac <+0x010c> cc int3
0x76feacad <+0x010d> cc int3
0x76feacae <+0x010e> cc int3
0x76feacaf <+0x010f> cc int3
好吧，我 想 我想通了。可能是。我改变的是我不再移动我的 OVERLAPPED 结构。我只能假设 WinUsb 保留了一个指向您在开始写入时传递的 OVERLAPPED 的指针。如果它移动，那么可能会发生故障。
在我能找到 OVERLAPPED 的文档的任何地方都没有提到这一点，但是更改我的代码以便 OVERLAPPED 动态分配一次并且永远不会移动似乎可以阻止崩溃。
不幸的是，我一直没有找到调试它的好方法。最好的方法是使用可逆调试器，但 Windows.
似乎不存在它们
我有这个代码：
void GetResult(WINUSB_INTERFACE_HANDLE InterfaceHandle, LPOVERLAPPED lpOverlapped)
{
DWORD numBytes = 0;
WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult(
InterfaceHandle,
lpOverlapped,
&numBytes,
TRUE
);
return;
uint8_t stack[64];
}
WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult 是一个 __stdcall 函数声明如下：
WINBOOL WINAPI WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult (WINUSB_INTERFACE_HANDLE InterfaceHandle, LPOVERLAPPED lpOverlapped, LPDWORD lpNumberOfBytesTransferred, WINBOOL bWait);
使用 GCC 5.3.0 (MinGW) 在调试模式下编译一切正常。 （我无法使用 VC++ 进行编译，因为我使用的是 GCC 扩展。）
但是如果我把它改成stack[80]然后它就会出现段错误！！
这是每种情况下的反汇编。 64（不崩溃）：
Dump of assembler code for function GetResult(void*, _OVERLAPPED*):
88 {
0x00408523 <+0>: push %ebp
0x00408524 <+1>: mov %esp,%ebp
0x00408526 <+3>: sub [=13=]x68,%esp
89 DWORD numBytes = 0;
0x00408529 <+6>: movl [=13=]x0,-0xc(%ebp)
90 WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult(
91 InterfaceHandle,
92 lpOverlapped,
93 &numBytes,
94 TRUE
95 );
=> 0x00408530 <+13>: movl [=13=]x1,0xc(%esp)
0x00408538 <+21>: lea -0xc(%ebp),%eax
0x0040853b <+24>: mov %eax,0x8(%esp)
0x0040853f <+28>: mov 0xc(%ebp),%eax
0x00408542 <+31>: mov %eax,0x4(%esp)
0x00408546 <+35>: mov 0x8(%ebp),%eax
0x00408549 <+38>: mov %eax,(%esp)
0x0040854c <+41>: call 0x409d58 <WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult@16>
0x00408551 <+46>: sub [=13=]x10,%esp
96 return;
0x00408554 <+49>: nop
97
98 uint8_t stack[64];
99 }
0x00408555 <+50>: leave
0x00408556 <+51>: ret
和 80（不会崩溃）：
Dump of assembler code for function GetResult(void*, _OVERLAPPED*):
88 {
0x00408523 <+0>: push %ebp
0x00408524 <+1>: mov %esp,%ebp
0x00408526 <+3>: sub [=14=]x78,%esp
89 DWORD numBytes = 0;
0x00408529 <+6>: movl [=14=]x0,-0xc(%ebp)
90 WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult(
91 InterfaceHandle,
92 lpOverlapped,
93 &numBytes,
94 TRUE
95 );
=> 0x00408530 <+13>: movl [=14=]x1,0xc(%esp)
0x00408538 <+21>: lea -0xc(%ebp),%eax
0x0040853b <+24>: mov %eax,0x8(%esp)
0x0040853f <+28>: mov 0xc(%ebp),%eax
0x00408542 <+31>: mov %eax,0x4(%esp)
0x00408546 <+35>: mov 0x8(%ebp),%eax
0x00408549 <+38>: mov %eax,(%esp)
0x0040854c <+41>: call 0x409d58 <WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult@16>
0x00408551 <+46>: sub [=14=]x10,%esp
96 return;
0x00408554 <+49>: nop
97
98 uint8_t stack[80];
99 }
0x00408555 <+50>: leave
0x00408556 <+51>: ret
__stdcall 的作用是添加 sub [=20=]x10,%esp 行，我猜是为了取消函数中的 ret [=21=]x10。
无论如何，这些看起来非常相似，我不知道它为什么会崩溃。我什至不能 100% 确定 哪里 它崩溃了（GDB 相当无用）但它在 WinUsb 函数调用附近的某个地方。
很难调试，因为如果我 运行 调试器设置了任何断点，它就不会崩溃。我怀疑这可能与时间有关 -
我还可以通过一些额外的 Sleep(100)s 来防止崩溃。有一次它似乎在 PerfIncrementULongLongCounterValue() 崩溃了，但谁知道呢...
有人知道为什么会发生这种情况吗？
编辑
WinUsb_GetOverlappedResult() 只是根据它的程序集直接调用 GetOverlappedResult()，所以我用它替换了调用。现在你需要 stack[96] 来导致崩溃，但当它发生时它至少告诉我真正的崩溃在哪里（我认为）！
下面是GetOverlappedResult()的反汇编。它在指示的地方崩溃，因为 ebp 是 0.
0x76feaba0 8b ff mov %edi,%edi
0x76feaba2 <+0x0002> 55 push %ebp
0x76feaba3 <+0x0003> 8b ec mov %esp,%ebp
0x76feaba5 <+0x0005> 83 ec 0c sub [=15=]xc,%esp
0x76feaba8 <+0x0008> a1 94 4b 09 77 mov 0x77094b94,%eax
0x76feabad <+0x000d> 33 c5 xor %ebp,%eax
0x76feabaf <+0x000f> 89 45 fc mov %eax,-0x4(%ebp)
0x76feabb2 <+0x0012> 83 7d 14 00 cmpl [=15=]x0,0x14(%ebp)
0x76feabb6 <+0x0016> 53 push %ebx
0x76feabb7 <+0x0017> 56 push %esi
0x76feabb8 <+0x0018> 57 push %edi
0x76feabb9 <+0x0019> 0f 84 b3 00 00 00 je 0x76feac72 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+210>
0x76feabbf <+0x001f> 83 cf ff or [=15=]xffffffff,%edi
0x76feabc2 <+0x0022> 8b 5d 08 mov 0x8(%ebp),%ebx
0x76feabc5 <+0x0025> 83 cb 01 or [=15=]x1,%ebx
0x76feabc8 <+0x0028> 85 ff test %edi,%edi
0x76feabca <+0x002a> 0f 84 a9 00 00 00 je 0x76feac79 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+217>
0x76feabd0 <+0x0030> b8 01 00 00 00 mov [=15=]x1,%eax
0x76feabd5 <+0x0035> c7 45 f4 01 00 00 00 movl [=15=]x1,-0xc(%ebp)
0x76feabdc <+0x003c> 89 45 f8 mov %eax,-0x8(%ebp)
0x76feabdf <+0x003f> 84 d8 test %bl,%al
0x76feabe1 <+0x0041> 0f 84 5e f3 03 00 je 0x77029f45 <KERNELBASE!GetCurrentProcess+43221>
0x76feabe7 <+0x0047> 6a 00 push [=15=]x0
0x76feabe9 <+0x0049> 68 dc 10 f2 76 push [=15=]x76f210dc
0x76feabee <+0x004e> 50 push %eax
0x76feabef <+0x004f> 68 ab ab ab ab push [=15=]xabababab
0x76feabf4 <+0x0054> ff 15 68 80 09 77 call *0x77098068
0x76feabfa <+0x005a> 8b f0 mov %eax,%esi
0x76feabfc <+0x005c> 85 f6 test %esi,%esi
0x76feabfe <+0x005e> 74 0e je 0x76feac0e <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+110>
0x76feac00 <+0x0060> 8d 45 f4 lea -0xc(%ebp),%eax
0x76feac03 <+0x0063> 8b ce mov %esi,%ecx
0x76feac05 <+0x0065> 50 push %eax
0x76feac06 <+0x0066> ff 15 5c 8a 09 77 call *0x77098a5c
0x76feac0c <+0x006c> ff d6 call *%esi
0x76feac0e <+0x006e> 33 c0 xor %eax,%eax
0x76feac10 <+0x0070> 83 e3 fe and [=15=]xfffffffe,%ebx
0x76feac13 <+0x0073> 89 45 f8 mov %eax,-0x8(%ebp)
0x76feac16 <+0x0076> 39 45 f4 cmp %eax,-0xc(%ebp)
0x76feac19 <+0x0079> 0f 85 26 f3 03 00 jne 0x77029f45 <KERNELBASE!GetCurrentProcess+43221>
0x76feac1f <+0x007f> 8b 75 0c mov 0xc(%ebp),%esi
0x76feac22 <+0x0082> 81 3e 03 01 00 00 cmpl [=15=]x103,(%esi)
0x76feac28 <+0x0088> 74 26 je 0x76feac50 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+176>
Crash:
0x76feac2a <+0x008a> 8b 45 10 mov 0x10(%ebp),%eax
0x76feac2d <+0x008d> 8b 4e 04 mov 0x4(%esi),%ecx
0x76feac30 <+0x0090> 89 08 mov %ecx,(%eax)
0x76feac32 <+0x0092> 8b 0e mov (%esi),%ecx
0x76feac34 <+0x0094> 85 c9 test %ecx,%ecx
0x76feac36 <+0x0096> 78 31 js 0x76feac69 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+201>
0x76feac38 <+0x0098> b8 01 00 00 00 mov [=15=]x1,%eax
0x76feac3d <+0x009d> 8b 4d fc mov -0x4(%ebp),%ecx
0x76feac40 <+0x00a0> 5f pop %edi
0x76feac41 <+0x00a1> 5e pop %esi
0x76feac42 <+0x00a2> 33 cd xor %ebp,%ecx
0x76feac44 <+0x00a4> 5b pop %ebx
0x76feac45 <+0x00a5> e8 0b f0 02 00 call 0x77019c55 <PerfIncrementULongLongCounterValue+197>
0x76feac4a <+0x00aa> 8b e5 mov %ebp,%esp
0x76feac4c <+0x00ac> 5d pop %ebp
0x76feac4d <+0x00ad> c2 10 00 ret [=15=]x10
0x76feac50 <+0x00b0> 8b 46 10 mov 0x10(%esi),%eax
0x76feac53 <+0x00b3> 85 c0 test %eax,%eax
0x76feac55 <+0x00b5> 74 46 je 0x76feac9d <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+253>
0x76feac57 <+0x00b7> 6a 00 push [=15=]x0
0x76feac59 <+0x00b9> 57 push %edi
0x76feac5a <+0x00ba> 50 push %eax
0x76feac5b <+0x00bb> e8 50 01 00 00 call 0x76feadb0 <WaitForSingleObjectEx>
0x76feac60 <+0x00c0> 85 c0 test %eax,%eax
0x76feac62 <+0x00c2> 74 c6 je 0x76feac2a <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+138>
0x76feac64 <+0x00c4> e9 fb f2 03 00 jmp 0x77029f64 <KERNELBASE!GetCurrentProcess+43252>
0x76feac69 <+0x00c9> e8 d2 f1 ff ff call 0x76fe9e40 <OpenThreadToken+64>
0x76feac6e <+0x00ce> 33 c0 xor %eax,%eax
0x76feac70 <+0x00d0> eb cb jmp 0x76feac3d <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+157>
0x76feac72 <+0x00d2> 33 ff xor %edi,%edi
0x76feac74 <+0x00d4> e9 49 ff ff ff jmp 0x76feabc2 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+34>
0x76feac79 <+0x00d9> 8b 75 0c mov 0xc(%ebp),%esi
0x76feac7c <+0x00dc> 81 3e 03 01 00 00 cmpl [=15=]x103,(%esi)
0x76feac82 <+0x00e2> 74 0a je 0x76feac8e <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+238>
0x76feac84 <+0x00e4> 33 c9 xor %ecx,%ecx
0x76feac86 <+0x00e6> 8d 45 f8 lea -0x8(%ebp),%eax
0x76feac89 <+0x00e9> f0 09 08 lock or %ecx,(%eax)
0x76feac8c <+0x00ec> eb 9c jmp 0x76feac2a <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+138>
0x76feac8e <+0x00ee> 68 e4 03 00 00 push [=15=]x3e4
0x76feac93 <+0x00f3> ff 15 c4 80 09 77 call *0x770980c4
0x76feac99 <+0x00f9> 33 c0 xor %eax,%eax
0x76feac9b <+0x00fb> eb a0 jmp 0x76feac3d <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+157>
0x76feac9d <+0x00fd> 8b c3 mov %ebx,%eax
0x76feac9f <+0x00ff> eb b6 jmp 0x76feac57 <KERNELBASE!GetOverlappedResult+183>
0x76feaca1 <+0x0101> cc int3
0x76feaca2 <+0x0102> cc int3
0x76feaca3 <+0x0103> cc int3
0x76feaca4 <+0x0104> cc int3
0x76feaca5 <+0x0105> cc int3
0x76feaca6 <+0x0106> cc int3
0x76feaca7 <+0x0107> cc int3
0x76feaca8 <+0x0108> cc int3
0x76feaca9 <+0x0109> cc int3
0x76feacaa <+0x010a> cc int3
0x76feacab <+0x010b> cc int3
0x76feacac <+0x010c> cc int3
0x76feacad <+0x010d> cc int3
0x76feacae <+0x010e> cc int3
0x76feacaf <+0x010f> cc int3
好吧，我 想 我想通了。可能是。我改变的是我不再移动我的 OVERLAPPED 结构。我只能假设 WinUsb 保留了一个指向您在开始写入时传递的 OVERLAPPED 的指针。如果它移动，那么可能会发生故障。
在我能找到 OVERLAPPED 的文档的任何地方都没有提到这一点，但是更改我的代码以便 OVERLAPPED 动态分配一次并且永远不会移动似乎可以阻止崩溃。
不幸的是，我一直没有找到调试它的好方法。最好的方法是使用可逆调试器，但 Windows.
似乎不存在它们