Avast!, Windows 7, and the BSOD / PFN_LIST_CORRUPT error

[RayLopez99]

BTW this could in theory be a hardware problem--bad memory--but for the reasons below I doubt it. Seems to be a problem caused by the aggressive AV program Avast!

RL

Avast! Freeware is a problem that causes in Windows 7 Professional, ServicePack 1, a Blue Screen of Death (BSOD) "BlueScreen" specifically the page memory error "PFN_LIST_CORRUPT". The problem seems to go away when I switched to AVG AntiVirus Free Edition.

The BSOD problem occurs only when you run Avast! but not Malwarebytes Anti-Malware nor AVG.

What is weird is that Avast! 8 worked fine until today--it worked for abouta year--then, coincidentally (?) when I went to Microsoft's site to check for updates after Windows SP1, there was a link, that I did NOT click, thatrequired ActiveX, and only ran in Windows Explorer, to give you the list of updates after SP1 (not install the updates, just give you the list).

My computer is running a $3 copy of Windows 7 I bought in a foreign country(I also have US "legal" copies but am too lazy to reinstall). It works fine, no viruses, but cannot get updates after SP1 (I was checking to see if I could manually install some of these updates, which is a bit risky since some updates install "Windows Genuine Advantage" which will cripple your "non-legal" copy of Windows) . So, is it possible that somehow, when I visited this Microsoft webpage, it secretly installed something in my computer to cripple it, that Avast! choked on? But again, Malwarebytes and AVG are not choking and producing BSOD, so I think it's a coincidence, and besides Idid NOT click on the Microsoft link.

Also, a poster here: http://www.sevenforums.com/bsod-help-support/285740-random-bsod-pfn_list_corrupt.html indicates that Avast! is the cause of this occasional problem. So it's a weird coincidence it happened today? But why today? It would not surprise me if Microsoft silently puts a file in your /Temp folder somewhere that somehow Avast!, for its own reasons, causes a BSOD.

RL

 

[Flasherly]

Avast! Freeware is a problem that causes in Windows 7 Professional,
Service Pack 1, a Blue Screen of Death (BSOD) "BlueScreen"
specifically the page memory error "PFN_LIST_CORRUPT". The problem
seems to go away when I switched to AVG AntiVirus Free Edition.

-
I got rid of them, finally - took awhile to get out all the stub
"infections" they leave, as I see it. Seems AVG is one such I ran
ages ago.

Switched to a routine of binary backups, firewalls, and a
GPL/SourceForge virus application scanner (standalone - no
monitoring). AV suites are dicks, dicking around all the time,
slowing things down, making sludge out of muck.

Without which, the onus is to keep one's eyes open for unusual
behavior, which becomes largely so much fluff, normally, when blasting
through with a binary backup every few days, a week, or so. Backed up
in 45 seconds via a SSD to be precise.

Of course I lay it all down without the web, and a connection is the
final thing after I've gotten everything situated and backed up in
some images. Sort of tiered, adding and building up on a few
multiples and dated-sequentially images. As they progress, they
become easier -- hardware changes and device drivers being the most
that get thrown at them. Everything else can be pretty much leisurely
tested for comfiture and suitability.

 

[RayLopez99]

On Thursday, October 31, 2013 4:25:18 PM UTC+8, RayLopez99 wrote:

[update]

Turns out Avast! is not the culprit, since I get the BSOD even now. But AVG AntiVirus Free Edition 2014 which I replaced it with is better than Avast! since faster and so I'm glad I got rid of Avast.

I think the drivers are a problem. Since this is a pirate copy of Windows 7 with Service Pack 1, I can't use the "automatic driver" feature of Win7. Instead I downloaded and installed an excellent freeware/shareware programcalled DriverMax that seems to be helping. It identified 26 out-of-date drivers, and the freeware version will replace 2 drivers a day, so in 13 days I'll have all replaced. A crash program called "BlueScreenView", also freeware, identified perhaps that the ATI graphics card driver is at fault (so I replaced it with the DriverMax suggestion) and also "ntoskrnl.exe" the standard Windows file, which apparently is routinely fingered as a culprit but usually blameless. Another possible fault is the program "Daemon ToolsLite" and/or Alcohol 120 I found out, which uses a certain SCSI interface SPTD driver that has huge potential problems (see here: http://www.daemonpro-help.com/en/problems_and_solutions/registry_and_sptd_problems.html) but in my case my registry did not have this SPTD driver installed, so I'm off the hook, though I don't like the trojan like nature of Daemon Tools lite (which tries to install itself to start during bootup).

To be continued...

PS--the generic PCI-to-PCI driver by Intel is replaced by DriverMax with what seems to be a "super generic" version, see this interesting thread: http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic.php?id=5911

(I've noted that the "Matrox Extio PCI Standard PCI-to-PCI Bridge" driver installs on ATI/nVidia (maybe others) chipset-driven boards. This supplantsthe default XP driver "Standard PCI-to-PCI bridge" and installs the file "MxEFUF32.sys" (MxEFUF32.sys v8.15.1.690, along with PCI.sys from machine.inf) from MxEFF.inf (D/G/M). )

RL

 

[Paul]

On Thursday, October 31, 2013 4:25:18 PM UTC+8, RayLopez99 wrote:

[update]

Turns out Avast! is not the culprit, since I get the BSOD even now. But AVG AntiVirus Free Edition 2014 which I replaced it with is better than Avast! since faster and so I'm glad I got rid of Avast.

I think the drivers are a problem. Since this is a pirate copy of Windows 7 with Service Pack 1, I can't use the "automatic driver" feature of Win7. Instead I downloaded and installed an excellent freeware/shareware program called DriverMax that seems to be helping. It identified 26 out-of-date drivers, and the freeware version will replace 2 drivers a day, so in 13 days I'll have all replaced. A crash program called "BlueScreenView", also freeware, identified perhaps that the ATI graphics card driver is at fault (so I replaced it with the DriverMax suggestion) and also "ntoskrnl.exe" the standard Windows file, which apparently is routinely fingered as a culprit but usually blameless. Another possible fault is the program "Daemon Tools Lite" and/or Alcohol 120 I found out, which uses a certain SCSI interface SPTD driver that has huge potential problems (see here: http://www.daemonpro-help.com/en/problems_and_solutions/registry_and_sptd_problems.html) but in my case my

registry did not have this SPTD driver installed, so I'm off the hook, though I don't like the trojan like nature of Daemon Tools lite (which tries to install itself to start during bootup).

To be continued...

PS--the generic PCI-to-PCI driver by Intel is replaced by DriverMax with what seems to be a "super generic" version, see this interesting thread: http://forum.driverpacks.net/viewtopic.php?id=5911

(I've noted that the "Matrox Extio PCI Standard PCI-to-PCI Bridge" driver installs on ATI/nVidia (maybe others) chipset-driven boards. This supplants the default XP driver "Standard PCI-to-PCI bridge" and installs the file "MxEFUF32.sys" (MxEFUF32.sys v8.15.1.690, along with PCI.sys from machine.inf) from MxEFF.inf (D/G/M). )

RL

You can get an ATI/AMD video driver from amd.com . No
need to use DriverMax for that.

Many of the other things, like pci or pci express bridge
drivers, they're either part of the chipset package
or part of the OS. Some "Matrox" thing should not
come floating in, unless somehow your system is filled
with Matrox hardware. And that isn't too likely.

DriverMax (and programs like it), are going to
highlight all sorts of things, that are not a problem,
and only tempt you to make more of a mess than you
already have.

Paul

 

[RayLopez99]

You can get an ATI/AMD video driver from amd.com . No

need to use DriverMax for that.

But the DriverMax people--a community site that uses 100s if not 1000s of people--is more accurate. See below on how the DriverMax community actuallygave me a more recent AMD driver than even the official AMD site. I downloaded the drivers from one part of AMD's website, but apparently there are newer drivers that DriverMax found.

AMD Catalyst Install Manager
Final Status: Success
Version of Item: 8.0.877.0 <--from the AMD site
Size: 20 Mbytes
AMD Display Driver
Final Status: Success
Version of Item: 8.970.100.1100 <--from DriverMax (later number!)
Size: 90 Mbytes

Many of the other things, like pci or pci express bridge

drivers, they're either part of the chipset package

or part of the OS. Some "Matrox" thing should not

come floating in, unless somehow your system is filled

with Matrox hardware. And that isn't too likely.

Maybe, but I get the feeling Matrox is a "super generic" that the DriverMaxcommunity found is more compatible (after any DriverMax download, you are asked whether the downloaded driver worked, and it gets a "vote" from the community). Anyhow, what is funny is that somehow Matrox is detected as already existing on my motherboard by DriverMax, though I don't recall the name from SIW (itself a problematic program if you get the freeware version), Belarc Advisor (excellent freeware), and other 'system identification' programs. So perhaps it somehow is already present in my system and I did not know it? Or perhaps as I say it's a 'super generic' that's deemed to be 'always safe'?

DriverMax (and programs like it), are going to

highlight all sorts of things, that are not a problem,

and only tempt you to make more of a mess than you

already have.

Nope, you represent the past Paul, {chuckle, chuckle} while I represent thefuture! I'm kidding. Actually the current system, being pirated, is not important except for programming, and I back up my user data. Worse case, I have a legal copy of Windows 7 and I could do a clean reinstall, but for now I'm going to try the DriverMax route and see if changing the drivers will make the occasional BSOD problem go away. We'll see and I'll keep the group posted if anything bad happens.

RL

 

[Paul]

But the DriverMax people--a community site that uses 100s if not 1000s of people--is more accurate. See below on how the DriverMax community actually gave me a more recent AMD driver than even the official AMD site. I downloaded the drivers from one part of AMD's website, but apparently there are newer drivers that DriverMax found.

AMD Catalyst Install Manager
Final Status: Success
Version of Item: 8.0.877.0 <--from the AMD site
Size: 20 Mbytes
AMD Display Driver
Final Status: Success
Version of Item: 8.970.100.1100 <--from DriverMax (later number!)
Size: 90 Mbytes



Maybe, but I get the feeling Matrox is a "super generic" that the DriverMax community found is more compatible (after any DriverMax download, you are asked whether the downloaded driver worked, and it gets a "vote" from the community). Anyhow, what is funny is that somehow Matrox is detected as already existing on my motherboard by DriverMax, though I don't recall the name from SIW (itself a problematic program if you get the freeware version), Belarc Advisor (excellent freeware), and other 'system identification' programs. So perhaps it somehow is already present in my system and I did not know it? Or perhaps as I say it's a 'super generic' that's deemed to be 'always safe'?


Nope, you represent the past Paul, {chuckle, chuckle} while I represent the future! I'm kidding. Actually the current system, being pirated, is not important except for programming, and I back up my user data. Worse case, I have a legal copy of Windows 7 and I could do a clean reinstall, but for now I'm going to try the DriverMax route and see if changing the drivers will make the occasional BSOD problem go away. We'll see and I'll keep the group posted if anything bad happens.

RL

I'd watch it a bit on the release numbers.

When a version number differs in one numeric field,
I'd be tempted to agree that the one with the higher value
is a later driver.

When drivers vary in more than one field, sometimes the
other field is an "OEM/Retail" selector. And then, you're
not comparing identical streams. So before concluding one
is later than the other in that situation, you really
need to find out what each field means. And a "secret
decoder ring" to figuring out driver numbering,
isn't always available.

At one time, Catalyst video drivers were identified by
year and month.

OK, here's a 13-11 or 2013-Nov driver. Since we're still
in November. This one is a beta, versus the Microsoft
WHQL tested ones. The WHQL ones tend to be older,
but are also supposed to be tested by Microsoft as
well as by the company writing the software.

http://support.amd.com/en-us/kb-articles/Pages/latest-catalyst-windows-beta.aspx

I would have to download that beta driver, to get some
digits to compare with. And the download looks like
about 250MB. Some of that might even be a small .NET
installer (for people who don't have the right .NET installed).

Apparently, the driver is divided into function types
(2D or 3D), and the first digit indicates the subsystem.
I'm not sure what the rest are for. With the numbers
you have above, you could easily be comparing desktop
to mobile, beta to WHQL. The numbering scheme might have
subtle difference for each of those.

The only reason for wanting "this months driver", is
if you're a gamer, you got a brand new video card,
and there is a bug in the rendering. For many other
purposes (and especially with a mature video card),
there's hardly any incentive to get a driver update.

A number of my video cards, they haven't had functional
changes in driver code for years. When you download
a "jumbo" driver package, the only thing changing
in the package, is the code for the most recent,
high end video card. Lots of other video cards, there
is hardly a reason to rev the code for those. On
ATI, an exception might be their attempts to do
"frame pacing". Something they've been working on
for a while. AMD/ATI is trying to solve micro-stuttering
in game play.

Paul