Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 9 May 1997 14:46:58 +0200 | From | Martin Mares <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH-2] NMI trap revised (was Re: NMI errors in 2.0.30??) |
| |
Hi,
> I have implemented the memory check. > S.o. suggested that I should read instead of write. Read two times ... > ah ... heh ... I remember ... processor caches ... hmmm in the next patch > I will correct this thing :) > nghe ... I'm just curious if it works or not (heh ... I have no way to > test it). I suspect the memory test should be done in a cli()/sti() pair, > because we do not want be disturbed by NMIs not generated intentionally by > us.
Hmmm... there are numerous "design flaws" in this solution:
(1) You read even the reserved pages which could contain memory-mapped ports doing strange things even when being read.
(2) You expect the freshly allocated temporary page to contain no parity errors.
> Hmmm I have seen an enable_NMI or something like that in the pre-2.1.37-5 > patch. It uses the bit 3 of 0x61, but my manual state that bit 3 ena/dis > I/O Channel Check while bit 2 ena/dis Memory Parity Check. Who is wrong ? > Me or the pre kernel patch ?
Maybe both :-)
I'll look at it today. Have a nice fortnight Martin
| |