What is a kernel panic?

[lugesm]

Don't think this is a Kernel Panic, but .. . . . .
Here's what happened: I downloaded a program from Mariner called MacJournal. I really liked the looks of the program and paid for it immediately. After using the program I exercised the "full screen" option (Something I had done before), and it work as expected. Then, when I tried to get out of that mode the computer hung. Nothing I could would break the freeze-up. I had to hold-in the rear power button on my 24" iMac for a long time and allow the computer to reboot.

 

[TBi]

What snob! You get-up on the wrong side of the bed???? Maybe you should go back to bed.
I would rather ask here where most people give real answers.

That should be...

"What a snob. Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed? (note only one ?) ..."

Well, you know, i do think that google gives real answers. More or less all the answers you get here are from people using google. It either comes directly or in "dumbed-down" language for some people who don't understand the techy stuff.

In my case i'd rather search google and get my answer in less than a minute rather than post on a forum and wait for people to get back to me while they go searching google for the answer to my query.

Asking a question here without doing the proper "homework*" first is quite selfish and lazy. You are saying it's ok for you to waste my time looking for an answer for you but you don't want to take the time to look for the answer yourself.

Do you really have something better to be doing? What are you doing while you wait for your answer? If i needed to know what a kernel panic was then i would have gotten the answer in less than a minute. That's about the same amount of time it took the poster to come here, go to the forums, type out his question and post it. So instead of getting an answer straight away. It took longer, because of sheer laziness.

* = RTFM (Read the ***** manual), STFG (search the ***** google, i might use that one in future)

 

[Bigtree]

That should be...

"What a snob. Did you get up on the wrong side of the bed? (note only one ?) ..."

Well, you know, i do think that google gives real answers. More or less all the answers you get here are from people using google. It either comes directly or in "dumbed-down" language for some people who don't understand the techy stuff.

In my case i'd rather search google and get my answer in less than a minute rather than post on a forum and wait for people to get back to me while they go searching google for the answer to my query.

Asking a question here without doing the proper "homework*" first is quite selfish and lazy. You are saying it's ok for you to waste my time looking for an answer for you but you don't want to take the time to look for the answer yourself.

Do you really have something better to be doing? What are you doing while you wait for your answer? If i needed to know what a kernel panic was then i would have gotten the answer in less than a minute. That's about the same amount of time it took the poster to come here, go to the forums, type out his question and post it. So instead of getting an answer straight away. It took longer, because of sheer laziness.

* = RTFM (Read the ***** manual), STFG (search the ***** google, i might use that one in future)

Who made you GOD of the forum?
BTW.... By the number of posts, I would say it IS a good question!!!!!! Your Rudeness!!!!

 

[TBi]

Who made you GOD of the forum?

The almighty herself did! Praise Jesus!

BTW.... By the number of posts, I would say it IS a good question!!!!!! Your Rudeness!!!!

Judging by the number of posts i'd say it is a question with a lot of answers. So why ask again!

Go forth ye and read yonder answers! Ask not what hath been answered, lest ye be smote! Let google showeth the way!

Or something...

 

[Bigtree]

The almighty herself did! Praise Jesus!



Judging by the number of posts i'd say it is a question with a lot of answers. So why ask again!

Go forth ye and read yonder answers! Ask not what hath been answered, lest ye be smote! Let google showeth the way!

Or something...

At least you have a good sense of humor...or at least you have god (sp?) sense of humor!!!!

 

[Voidness]

Its doable. If the person has bought computers that used windows most stable drivers. Used programs that played nice with windows (not trying to override the kernel like some games do or even some other programs) Browsed safe internet sites and work cleanly. Then they could go without a kernel panic. But what normally happends is we let our guard down and overfill something, run the wrong program, cheap out on the hardware... Cause the BSOD

I guess you haven't used Windows 98 before

Not even in the interests of science?

You reminded me. I was beta testing one of the private builds of Parallels Desktop 3.0 a few months ago, and I came across a bug that would guarantee a kernel panic! It was quite easy to reproduce

 

[TBi]

I guess you haven't used Windows 98 before

Don't compare 98 to OSX. Compare it to OS9. Now you gotta ask yourself which one of those was more stable. Then again at least 98 had better (for it's day) multitasking!

 

[jellomizer]

I guess you haven't used Windows 98 before

Still even with Windows 98 if you keep things clean and don't push it Windows 98 runs very smoothly. Trouble happened when you push to the OS To far For Windows 98 installing shareware/freeware pluggin in USB Devices, adding new hardware. adding plugins to the browser increases the risk. But if you use it for a couple things and it does those things well then You can run Windows 98 for years without crashes.

 

[yellow]

Could someone please provide me with a reproducible or verifiable example of a kernel panic caused by an OS or software issue?

Sure!

Wed Jun 20 17:38:14 2007

Unresolved kernel trap(cpu 1): 0x300 - Data access DAR=0x0000000093F1403C PC=0x000000000029F14C
Latest crash info for cpu 1:
   Exception state (sv=0x454AE780)
      PC=0x0029F14C; MSR=0x00009030; DAR=0x93F1403C; DSISR=0x40000000; LR=0x003024D0; R1=0x2C523C10; XCP=0x0000000C (0x300 - Data access)
      Backtrace:
0x003024A0 0x4573A81C 0x000912A8 0x00091514 0x00044C18 0x0002921C 
         0x000233F8 0x000ABCAC 0x00000000 
      Kernel loadable modules in backtrace (with dependencies):
         com.apple.filesystems.smbfs(1.3.7)@0x45714000
Proceeding back via exception chain:
   Exception state (sv=0x454AE780)
      previously dumped as "Latest" state. skipping...
   Exception state (sv=0x43350780)
      PC=0x9000B448; MSR=0x0000D030; DAR=0x45740640; DSISR=0x40000000; LR=0x9000B39C; R1=0xBFFFF4E0; XCP=0x00000030 (0xC00 - System call)

Kernel version:
Darwin Kernel Version 8.9.0: Thu Feb 22 20:54:07 PST 2007; root:xnu-792.17.14~1/RELEASE_PPC
panic(cpu 1 caller 0xFFFF0003): 0x300 - Data access
Latest stack backtrace for cpu 1:
      Backtrace:
         0x000952D8 0x000957F0 0x00026898 0x000A8004 0x000AB980 
Proceeding back via exception chain:
   Exception state (sv=0x454AE780)
      PC=0x0029F14C; MSR=0x00009030; DAR=0x93F1403C; DSISR=0x40000000; LR=0x003024D0; R1=0x2C523C10; XCP=0x0000000C (0x300 - Data access)
      Backtrace:
0x003024A0 0x4573A81C 0x000912A8 0x00091514 0x00044C18 0x0002921C 
         0x000233F8 0x000ABCAC 0x00000000 
      Kernel loadable modules in backtrace (with dependencies):
         com.apple.filesystems.smbfs(1.3.7)@0x45714000
   Exception state (sv=0x43350780)
      PC=0x9000B448; MSR=0x0000D030; DAR=0x45740640; DSISR=0x40000000; LR=0x9000B39C; R1=0xBFFFF4E0; XCP=0x00000030 (0xC00 - System call)

Kernel version:
Darwin Kernel Version 8.9.0: Thu Feb 22 20:54:07 PST 2007; root:xnu-792.17.14~1/RELEASE_PPC
*********

Oh, and a thread if it makes you happier.

http://forums.macosxhints.com/showthread.php?t=47330

 

[dpaanlka]

Ever heard of Google? It's a really good search engine.

What is a kernel panic

OMGWTFBBQ... that was SOO hard...

EDIT: For completeness sake, due to your misspelling, i looked for "What is a kernal panic" aswell.

Totally unnecessary...

In 15 prior years of Windows use I never had a system crash; only read about the "Blue Screen of Death" on the Internet.

Yeah... I believe that.

Sorry to read about your bad experiences. I have no motive for BS here, just stating the facts.

I think most of us have come to the conclusion that plenty of people have motive to BS about their decades of flawless PC performance on this forum. Personal pride, for example. Envy, another example.

I love Macs, but even I admit I've had the occasional Kernel Panic in the past.

IMO the only way to have that experience with windows is to not hook up internet service and not load any programs

Yup that pretty much sums it up... why just the the other day I was using a PC and... oh nevermind, you can probably tell where that is going.

rant about google

Please, be quiet.

 

[TBi]

Totally unnecessary...

My thoughts exactly on the original question in this thread!

Please, be quiet.

I did not rant about google! I ranted about peoples lack of the use of google! Saying i ranted about google would lead people to believe i had something against google. Which is the exact opposite of what i believe

Please choose your words more carefully

 

[dpaanlka]

Please choose your words more carefully

It was a rant, and largely about Google. A rant about google. For someone professing to not understand why anybody would waste time asking something (however trivial) in a forum, you sure are spending a lot of time responding.

 

[IJ Reilly]

You reminded me. I was beta testing one of the private builds of Parallels Desktop 3.0 a few months ago, and I came across a bug that would guarantee a kernel panic! It was quite easy to reproduce

Does Parallels attempt to address hardware directly? This seems to be the source of most of the kernel panics that I have personally witnessed.

Oh, and a thread if it makes you happier.

Ecstatic, thank you.

Not sure I followed that thread entirely. In the end, what was found to be the source of the kernel panic?

 

[TBi]

It was a rant, and largely about Google. A rant about google. For someone professing to not understand why anybody would waste time asking something (however trivial) in a forum, you sure are spending a lot of time responding.

I'd still prefer

"A rant about people not using google instead of posting questions on forums that google would easily answer"

but i agree that would be a bit long.

My problem though is people expecting others to waste their time while they do nothing.

How about...

"rant about wasting others times with trivial questions"

still too long though...

As to the fact that i'm spending a lot of time responding? I'm bored! It helps me fill the wee hours! Such a sad state of affairs really!

 

[Roric]

Sorry for such a basic question.

I hope it's not a piece of corn getting wedged between the space bar and the command key!

Close....

I've got that posted on my office door.

 

[yellow]

Not sure I followed that thread entirely. In the end, what was found to be the source of the kernel panic?

Still completely unknown.

The oddest part, if one syncs manually there's no problem. But the auto-sync KPs. Same data, different behaviors with essentially the same process.

Ultimately I abandoned the auto-sync feature since I was creating a culture of ignorance. So this hasn't really been an issue for me in a bit.

Still.. I hate not being able to solve an issue!

 

[TBi]

Does Parallels attempt to address hardware directly? This seems to be the source of most of the kernel panics that I have personally witnessed.

I'd say there is some direct hardware access due to the virtualisation. Also parallels allows you to "disconnect" hardware from OSX and connect it directly into windows. If done wrong this could lead to driver issues which could cause the panics.

Virtualisation is such a low level process it must need you to be very stringent in what you do and how you do it.

That would be my guessing.

 

[IJ Reilly]

Still completely unknown.

The oddest part, if one syncs manually there's no problem. But the auto-sync KPs. Same data, different behaviors with essentially the same process.

Ultimately I abandoned the auto-sync feature since I was creating a culture of ignorance. So this hasn't really been an issue for me in a bit.

Still.. I hate not being able to solve an issue!

Try not to bust an aorta over it, that's my advice.

I'd say there is some direct hardware access due to the virtualisation. Also parallels allows you to "disconnect" hardware from OSX and connect it directly into windows. If done wrong this could lead to driver issues which could cause the panics.

Virtualisation is such a low level process it must need you to be very stringent in what you do and how you do it.

That would be my guessing.

Low-level calls seem to be the source of these issues, when programmers either can't or don't want to allow the OS to mediate.

The point I'd make here is that vast majority of software has little or no need to make low-level calls, which is the source of my skepticism over claims that any given kernel panic is software-caused. It can be, but it's relatively rare and the instances I imagine are fairly well documented.

 

[TBi]

The point I'd make here is that vast majority of software has little or no need to make low-level calls, which is the source of my skepticism over claims that any given kernel panic is software-caused. It can be, but it's relatively rare and the instances I imagine are fairly well documented.

I agree with that. I'd always look for a hardware problem before considering software. Unless of course the kernel panic occured everytime i opened up software package X

When you think about it nearly all of the problems with windows is down to bad drivers. This is the main reason why sound card drivers in Vista aren't allowed direct access to the hardware any more. They have to talk through a hardware abstraction layer or something.

 

[thesdx]

 

[The General]

LOL

STFG! I love it!

 

[TBi]

LOL

STFG! I love it!

It's not as elegant or correct english-wise as i'd like but it does get the message across.

EDIT: I just realised this term is already in use.

Ironically (is that the right word?) i found it by searching on google!

EDIT2:

Used when someone asks about stupid things that can found with google easily.

-hey, where can i find metallica lyrics?
-STFG

So true (emphasis mine)