Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 22 Oct 1999 06:21:18 -0700 | From | Simon Kirby <> | Subject | Re: 2.2.13pre17 oops in find_buffer |
| |
On Fri, Oct 22, 1999 at 12:09:06PM +0300, Catalin Muresan wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 21, 1999 at 10:32:02AM -0400, Simon Kirby wrote: > sim> It seems to find bad memory so easily with such a simple program. > sim> *shrug* :) > sim> > sim> I've put a slightly updated version up here: > sim> > sim> ftp://blue.netnation.com/pub/memtest.c > sim> > sim> I added a comment, fixed a spelling error and cosmetics in the fprintfs, > sim> but didn't change anything else (so hopefully it won't lose its magical > sim> powers). :) > sim> > sim> Simon- > > would it be a good idea to include the tester into a linux kernel > so we could have a bootdisk with which could test all the memory > not only the free part?
There is already "memtest86" which does this (well, it uses the kernel's boot stuff, I think), and then tests as much as it can. This is probably better than running it over top of the kernel. If not, I guess this would be a good idea. :)
Also, for a machine that is assumed to have a hardware problem, I wouldn't trust memtest.c's output simply if it doesn't print a failure in a few hours...other testers actually have some knowledge of the hardware they're running on built in to them, and so they theoretically should do a better job than mine. *shrug* :) Although, in Miquel van Smoorenburg's case, he had run a DOS memory tester for 48 hours before which didn't turn up anything, so maybe it is worth it...
Simon-
[ Stormix Technologies Inc. ][ NetNation Communcations Inc. ] [ sim@stormix.com ][ sim@netnation.com ] [ Opinions expressed are not necessarily those of my employers. ]
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |