lkml.org 
[lkml]   [1996]   [Apr]   [23]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
Date
From
SubjectRe: memtest86, built into kernel
Ulrich Windl writes:
> On 22 Apr 96 at 17:29, Matthew J Brown wrote:
>
> > Basically they say there that with modern SIMMs the MTBF for a soft
> > error (ie. alpha particle corruption) is between 12-30 years of
> > continual system use.
>
> Interestingly, this would require to test the RAM for at least 30
> years to be sure. No company will guarantee the MTBF.

No, but that doesn't stop them quoting estimated ones ;) Intel's
document extrapolates quoted soft error rates by RAM manufacturers
into MTBF, anyway.

As Alan Cox said in a previous message, Intel may be right that soft
errors (alpha particle corruption etc) are that rare these days, but
their calculations are ignoring all other sources of error, including
manufacturing defects.

Intel also have a vested interest in convincing us that parity isn't
needed, since they decided not to use it in their popular Triton
chipsets.

I don't think that parity gives you that much protection, though, so
I'm not convinced that it's worth seeking out systems that support it.
ECC may be a different story.

-Matt


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2005-03-22 13:37    [W:0.047 / U:0.100 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site