--+PbGPm1eXpwOoWkI
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On 2005.10.14 12:32:24 -0700, John Klos wrote:
| >Well, myself, I wouldn't panic or anything. ;)
| >
| >*scnr*
|=20
| Ha ha ha ha...
|=20
| >Seriously, I've never seen a panic cause its own new panic except (I wou=
ld
| >expect) for a hardware glitch *right* *that* *second*.
|=20
| Or whatever caused the first panic is something that got used during the=
=20
| sync. SCSI driver related? What's this rnd stuff? I'd guess that that's=
=20
| the /dev/random stuff that gets updated when the system is idle? Why is=
=20
| the softclock being run by / at the same time as hardclock? I have so muc=
h=20
| to learn...

A panic in a panic is not new. Most of the times you get uvm_fault's
ddb will panic the system too. Also, not to mention that I have a "TLB
ipi rendevouz failed" panic on my i386 MP box whenever I get a panic
=66rom something else.

		-- Rui Paulo

--+PbGPm1eXpwOoWkI
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2 (NetBSD)

iD8DBQFDUCpmZPqyxs9FH4QRAr1KAJ4xYALQFdkMM6P+36MtmXRee8w0EwCffWwl
2DT98XK5c9TV1zc5b+EJ1t0=
=pRzq
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--+PbGPm1eXpwOoWkI--