Talk:Double fault

Going to drop the merge, if anything the triple fault should be merged into the double fault article. MadnessASAP (talk) 00:12, 26 November 2007 (UTC)

TSS links to the wrong thing! Argh, I hate article links by acronyms.

Can someone tell me what TSS really stands for in this context and link to it here? Graue 05:51, 22 May 2005 (UTC)

TSS = Task state segment. — Bcat ^{(talk • email)} 19:07, 14 August 2005 (UTC)

"As double faults can only happen due to kernel bugs, they are rarely[clarify] caused by userland programs."

A double fault is imho _always_ a kernel bug. If a userland program can trigger a double fault, than this is nevertheless a kernel bug, because the kernel shouldn't allow the userland program to do so. --Solaristhesun 06:13, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Not entirely. I am, and should be, able to cause a double fault by trashing /proc/kcore. In general, it can happen whenever the kernel places significant trust in a userland program, which is not necessarily a bug (though one may consider it unwise under all circumstances). 85.146.241.224 00:18, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

If the processor doesn't have a complete memory management unit (MMU), but can still have execution protection, then you could theoretically cause a double fault with a user program. An example is the TI89 graphing calculator; it doesn't have a MMU, but it does have execution and write protections. If a program doesn't restore an interrupt vector, you could cause the system to crash, but I don't know if that would even be considered a double fault. Joeyadams (talk) 03:04, 28 November 2007 (UTC)