Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!rpi!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!swrinde!cs.utexas.edu!uunet!auspex!guy
From: guy@auspex.auspex.com (Guy Harris)
Newsgroups: comp.unix.admin
Subject: Re: SVVS requires a panic?  Was: Re: CRASH your TANDEM :
Message-ID: <6805@auspex.auspex.com>
Date: 23 Mar 91 21:17:05 GMT
References: <669239249.25261@mindcraft.com> <1991Mar18.174115.26445@zorch.SF-Bay.ORG> <669405568.1162@mindcraft.com>
Organization: Auspex Systems, Santa Clara
Lines: 19

>An e-mail followup from one of the people I talked to in January
>clarified this:  the SVVS expected a panic when the timeout table
>overflowed.

OK, I'm *still* skeptical that the person you talked to in January
really said that the SVVS expected a panic:

1) how does the SVVS manage to test for a panic?  It's not as if there's
   a call in UNIX that says "notify me when the system panics"....

2) how does the SVVS manage to attempt to make entries in the timeout
   table?

3) how do the SVVS authors manage to justify this, given that the
   callout mechanism in many UNIX kernels isn't specified *anywhere* in
   the SVID - it's an implementation detail?

4) what version of the SVVS were they using, given that the version I
   ran at Sun didn't do any such check?