David Cantú

@ericstj, @tarekgh, this seems to be the issue that https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/117619 tried to mitigate. Looks like the problem is in SetAccessControl to the Mutex named `netfxperf.1.0` which is used for all...

Hit again in https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/116459. Details: https://dev.azure.com/dnceng-public/public/_build/results?buildId=1064009&view=ms.vss-test-web.build-test-results-tab&runId=28743132&resultId=100010&paneView=dotnet-dnceng.dnceng-build-release-tasks.helix-test-information-tab Console log: https://helixr1107v0xd1eu3ibi6ka.blob.core.windows.net/dotnet-runtime-refs-pull-116459-merge-42187beb0ff3464ca2/NoWorkload-ST-Wasm.Build.Tests/1/console.d1a8b528.log?skoid=8eda00af-b5ec-4be9-b69b-0919a2338892&sktid=72f988bf-86f1-41af-91ab-2d7cd011db47&skt=2025-06-11T01%3A51%3A04Z&ske=2025-06-11T02%3A51%3A04Z&sks=b&skv=2024-11-04&sv=2024-11-04&st=2025-06-11T01%3A51%3A04Z&se=2025-06-11T02%3A51%3A04Z&sr=c&sp=r&sig=MThp2J42pE9vMFNMjMgK5lIm%2BCRW1MrBKVsZxgZhDTU%3D

https://github.com/dotnet/runtime/pull/104972 was an attempt to fix it but looks like ProcessInfo.Threads is not being Refresh()'d properly.

No recent timeouts, closing.

The [console.87f9f6d3.log](https://helixr1107v0xd1eu3ibi6ka.blob.core.windows.net/dotnet-runtime-refs-heads-release-90-staging-faf97cdf7d434f9f90/baseservices-exceptions/1/console.87f9f6d3.log?helixlogtype=result) and the [test results](https://helixr1107v0xd1eu3ibi6ka.blob.core.windows.net/dotnet-runtime-refs-heads-release-90-staging-faf97cdf7d434f9f90/baseservices-exceptions/1/baseservices-exceptions.testResults.xml.txt?helixlogtype=result) say it all passed, yet it was flagged as an error.

May be worth looking other Streams where this is not mentioned, also on Write/Read/ReadByte. e.g: https://learn.microsoft.com/en-us/dotnet/api/system.io.bufferedstream.writebyte?view=net-8.0

> move any information from an underlying buffer to its destination, clear the buffer, or both. I still think this is a valid guideline for Stream.Flush. I would rather amend...

Do you have a proposal on how to illustrate it?

> Do you think this is too confusing? I think is not obvious how the specified versions are supported. Looks like the preview package targets both current (9.0) and previous...

This is from a preview6 run from Jun 20th, it might've been fixed in main already.