2011/1/11 Chuck Swiger <cswi...@mac.com>: > On Jan 11, 2011, at 12:11 PM, David DEMELIER wrote: >> I'm just guessing why current BSD panic() when a problem occurs, all >> modern operating systems solve the problem instead of crashing >> suddently and corrupting all your data without saving your work. > > You've got it backwards. A system panic()s to avoid writing corrupted data > to disk. > >> Yes, why this function exists? There is no way to solve a problem >> without panic'ing? Is panic really needed? > > Sometimes, yes. If it was possible for the kernel to handle an error > condition without panic()ing, then that is obviously preferred-- but there > are situations where there is no way for the system to recover. Common > examples of that include when the boot disk fails or disappears, or when the > kernel runs out of memory in a situation where it can't get more free pages > available. Less common is when some kind of kernel invariant is violated, > indicating that essential kernel data structures have been corrupted. >
Well I see, I know that kern.sync_on_panic exists to force a sync on a panic but because my laptop usually does not core dump so never reboot my disk are not sync'ed :-( it results in a file system not clean an that's the thing I really hate. >> Imagine someone working on something really important and his computer just >> panic, his work not >> saved everybody shout at him in the corporation. He lose his job, his >> wife, his dog, everything is wrong, just because of a panic() ! > > I admire your contrived example. :-) The data available to me suggests that > Solaris boxes on enterprise-grade hardware have the highest uptimes; FreeBSD > (and related platforms like NetBSD/OpenBSD/DFly/etc) are next, then MacOS X, > then Linux, then Windows. > > I expect anything based on Unix to be routinely capable of multi-year > uptimes; some carefully chosen Windows boxes can also do that, but the > widespread prevalence of security issues requiring reboots on Windows means > that I don't usually see Windows boxes with uptimes of greater than a month. > >> Seriously, I really hate when I play some music that suddenly the >> music get stucked in a infinite loop, why ? > > Probably a bug in the sound card driver. > No no, it was a panic that didn't core dump so I needed to do a hard reboot. >> I don't know because the panic does not core dump. But after some search I >> found that the panic >> was done because of conky. How the hell conky can panic FreeBSD? We are in >> 2011 ! I think even Window 2000 does not crash on a user-land software. > > "think"? If you don't have experience running Windows 2000 are thus are > simply guessing, let me assure you that Win 2000 can and does (or did) panic > due to userland software. > In fact I like FreeBSD, and I don't expect running anything else. But I must say that I didnt see windows 2000 crashing on my every boxes I have before switching to FreeBSD. I understand everything, corrupts kernel data must not be used. That's why panic are made to prevent any dangerous things. -- Demelier David _______________________________________________ freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current To unsubscribe, send any mail to "freebsd-current-unsubscr...@freebsd.org"
