lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2011]   [Jun]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
/
From
Date
SubjectRE: [PATCH v2 0/3] support for broken memory modules (BadRAM)
> > I am very curious about your findings.  Independently of those, I am in
> > favour of a patch that enables longer e820 tables if it has no further
> > impact on speed or space.
> >
>
> That is already in the mainline kernel, although only if fed from the
> boot loader (it was developed in the context of mega-NUMA machines); the
> stub fetching from INT 15h doesn't use this at the moment.

Does it scale? Current X86 systems go up to about 2TB - presumably
in the form of 256 8GB DIMMs (or maybe 512 4GB ones). If a faulty
row or column on a DIMM can give rise to 4K bad pages, then these
large systems could conceivably have 1-2 million bad pages (while
still being quite usable - a loss of 4-8G from a 2TB system is down
in the noise). Can we handle a 2 million entry e820 table? Do we
want to?

Perhaps we may end up with a composite solution. Use e820 to map out
the bad pages below some limit (like 4GB). Preferably in the boot loader
so it can find a range of good memory to load the kernel. Then use
badRAM patterns for addresses over 4GB for Linux to avoid bad pages
by flagging their page structures.

-Tony


\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2011-06-24 18:49    [W:0.761 / U:0.324 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site