Messages in this thread | | | Date | Mon, 22 Dec 2003 12:05:57 -0500 | From | Chris Frey <> | Subject | Re: Oops with 2.4.23 |
| |
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/
| |