[lkml]   [1996]   [Nov]   [20]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
Messages in this thread
SubjectRe: Memory Trauam

On Wed, 20 Nov 1996, Kenneth Albanowski wrote:

> On Tue, 19 Nov 1996, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> > One thing is certainly true. Power-on-self-test and check-memory routines
> > are just for "show". You could lean a lot more by seeing if the system
> > boots and can then do something useful for several days.
> Hmm. Odd idea here: how difficult would it be to create a deamon that sits
> in the background, mmaps in physical pages sequentially, and performs
> memory tests on them? Obviously you couldn't test any owned or kernel
> memory this way, but you could run the thing on low priority all the time.
> --
> Kenneth Albanowski (, CIS: 70705,126)
I did something sorta like that to test my new Pentium 166 with the Intel
chip. I made a simple program that declared a local 2048 byte buffer (on
the stack). It forked a child, then wrote (forever) random numbers to
the buffer. Of course the child did this too as did its child, etc. When
the forked failed, I allowed the children to kill each other until everything
unwound to the original parent. This could continue forever.

Seeing that this worked okay, I had each child write a buffer of data to
a different file then close. The result was a machine that exercised about
everything except networking code. After about a day without any crashes,
I felt that the machine (this machine) was solid.

Dick Johnson
Richard B. Johnson
Project Engineer
Analogic Corporation
Voice : (508) 977-3000 ext. 3754
Fax : (508) 532-6097
Modem : (508) 977-6870
Ftp :
Email :,
Penguin : Linux version 2.1.11 on an i586 machine.
Warning : It's hard to remain at the trailing edge of technology.

 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:38    [W:0.050 / U:0.476 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site