![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 06:17:00PM -0800, Barry K. Nathan wrote: > On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 12:35:24AM +0100, Maciej Zenczykowski wrote: > > you did run memtest for a minimum dozen hours? sometimes it takes that > > long to find errors... > > On one machine (with a bad power supply, as it turned out) it took > memtest86 almost 18 hours to report an error. So 12 hours isn't enough > either. > > (On a related note, one machine that I tested with mprime's Torture Test > <http://www.mersenne.org/> took I think close to 43 hours to show a > failure. In that case I don't know if the failure was the CPU or the > motherboard, because in the end both failed on that system.) At what point do people start suspecting the kernel? I mean, I would hope the linux kernel is not so badly written as to stress the machine 24/7. So after 12 hours of running memtest86 with clean results, does that not begin to point to a software error rather than hardware? - Chris - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 12:59 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||