From owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG  Wed Oct 16 21:43:34 2013
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-hackers@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: hackers@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org
 [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4F5F2769;
 Wed, 16 Oct 2013 21:43:34 +0000 (UTC)
 (envelope-from amvandemore@gmail.com)
Received: from mail-pd0-x22a.google.com (mail-pd0-x22a.google.com
 [IPv6:2607:f8b0:400e:c02::22a])
 (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits))
 (No client certificate requested)
 by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 2370F2CE3;
 Wed, 16 Oct 2013 21:43:34 +0000 (UTC)
Received: by mail-pd0-f170.google.com with SMTP id x10so1590010pdj.15
 for <multiple recipients>; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
 h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
 :cc:content-type;
 bh=OypKWDuWhM0L/1ZGbhnGVMKtnYZt/c861rTX9VoQ9d0=;
 b=NMzLhn/0w2xubh0j4RBNrmmvVt+9xQig/Ag06Y4bRyDjML774rprSFb8088h/kBAMb
 OwLbs3vNgACMW93YAavMjlHp4B132oPRZ1OyJcsGbSesecZE95Nz5Mjr/gxySqMJM/k/
 nj+aZL5LAirgRBWT0lJ/ubhhq7jyxNHb8nHRGJcMCSLe+ILqj5jvW5+xU7fcd7/lSEz1
 O2s6qVJHgcoxYIFzs/2mogc/HnP5R7hJVWP5ug3lzPuq9NkxCPTRs4bmWh9gxE3S3Tsf
 QddI3VTmOS/qMMFEXiOSIwYvkk4QvaDt4Nr4wj9U5ajVcXiZK5CUJEbkZvs9DKsuO/iU
 RExg==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by 10.68.134.65 with SMTP id pi1mr4995110pbb.59.1381959813679;
 Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by 10.70.92.79 with HTTP; Wed, 16 Oct 2013 14:43:33 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: <201310161650.52354.jhb@freebsd.org>
References: <20130719.174511.786.3@DOMY-PC>
 <201310071212.05281.jhb@freebsd.org>
 <20131016.104912.479.1@DOMY-PC>
 <201310161650.52354.jhb@freebsd.org>
Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 16:43:33 -0500
Message-ID: <CA+tpaK23Wo8Nemi-xUy3-BZSUdeWkpWQh_o6Ws=mxi6jrbubvw@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: UFS related panic (daily <-> find)
From: Adam Vande More <amvandemore@gmail.com>
To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
X-Content-Filtered-By: Mailman/MimeDel 2.1.14
Cc: rank1seeker@gmail.com, hackers@freebsd.org
X-BeenThere: freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14
Precedence: list
List-Id: Technical Discussions relating to FreeBSD
 <freebsd-hackers.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/options/freebsd-hackers>, 
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-hackers>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-hackers@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-hackers>,
 <mailto:freebsd-hackers-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 16 Oct 2013 21:43:34 -0000

On Wed, Oct 16, 2013 at 3:50 PM, John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org> wrote:

> Same drill as before, see what instruction this is.  Actually, this looks
> to
> be in the same location as your last panic, so a NULL pointer is 0x1
> instead
> of 0x0 again.  In my experience, this would still indicate failing RAM to
> me,
> memtest86+ notwithstanding (memtest86+ is single threaded AFAIK, so it may
> not stress the hardware quite the same, e.g. if the error is heat related,
> etc.).


memtest* cannot conclusively diagnose a dimm as good.  Usually the only
practical solution is to swap modules with known good ones.

-- 
Adam Vande More