Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1755042AbXLVUtB (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:49:01 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1753123AbXLVUsy (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:48:54 -0500 Received: from main.gmane.org ([80.91.229.2]:34229 "EHLO ciao.gmane.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1753488AbXLVUsx (ORCPT ); Sat, 22 Dec 2007 15:48:53 -0500 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org From: Matthew Bloch Subject: Re: Testing RAM from userspace / question about memmap= arguments Date: Sat, 22 Dec 2007 20:48:20 +0000 Message-ID: References: <20071221125812.GA4052@ucw.cz> <000001c84472$74b245e0$5e16d1a0$@com> <20071222134612.GA4098@ucw.cz> <476D35F6.90900@davidnewall.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org X-Gmane-NNTP-Posting-Host: desk.home.bloch.tv User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.6 (X11/20071008) In-Reply-To: <476D35F6.90900@davidnewall.com> Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 1952 Lines: 42 David Newall wrote: > Pavel Machek wrote: >> On Sat 2007-12-22 13:42:47, Richard D wrote: >> >>> Cant you, modify bootmem allocator to test with memtest patterns and >>> then >>> use kexec (as Pavel suggested) to test the one where kernel was sitting >>> earlier? >>> >> >> >> I do not think you need to modify anything in kernel. Just use >> /dev/mem to test areas that kernel doesn't see, then kexec into place >> you already tested, and test the rest. >> > > That's still an insufficient test. One failure mode is writes at one > location corrupting cells at another. > > The idea of wanting to do comprehensive and robust memory testing from > within the operating system seems dubious at best, to me. Well if we're trying to be thorough, either way is flawed - you can't possibly test pathologically-misbehaving memory from code running from inside of it, you'd want some kind of non-uniform memory arrangement to do that properly. memtest86's value is that it at least *tries* to work in this environment by dynamically relocating itself, but its memory testing algorithms aren't the hard bit. Also I'm not necessarily interested in *which* section of which DIMM is faulty, just a yes or no is enough so I can send the faulty ones back to the shop. I don't agree that adding a network stack to memtest86's bare kernel is going to be easier than working out how to get Linux to do the same job, with its luxurious programming environment. I can already automate memtest via serial consoles, power cycling, network booting and so on but it's ugly. I will report back in the new year when I've had a chance to play with our collection of dodgy hardware. -- Matthew -- 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/