Date: Fri, 24 Jun 2005 10:04:35 -0400 From: Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> To: freebsd-amd64@freebsd.org Cc: Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> Subject: Re: Athlon64 board with ECC support? Message-ID: <20050624100435.A88745@cons.org> In-Reply-To: <20050624133457.GC65546@dragon.NUXI.org>; from obrien@freebsd.org on Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 06:34:57AM -0700 References: <200506131616.j5DGGDfr067534@lurza.secnetix.de> <200506132038.25975.josemi@redesjm.local> <200506131147.50300.peter@wemm.org> <200506132102.56346.josemi@redesjm.local> <20050623181856.A67269@cons.org> <20050624133457.GC65546@dragon.NUXI.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
David O'Brien wrote on Fri, Jun 24, 2005 at 06:34:57AM -0700: > On Thu, Jun 23, 2005 at 06:18:56PM -0400, Martin Cracauer wrote: > > And I suppose the BIOS needs to support it, too, > > Correct. > > > although it is not > > clear to me how ECC exceptions are supposed to be routed anyway. > > Clearly some chip not being CPU or RAM needs to have a say in the > > exception delivery? Anybody understands how this works? > > Why?? The memory controller is on the same die as the CPU. The > exception is handled w/in the CPU and it never goes out to any support > chip. Hm, so what does the BIOS do if it has the ECC options, exactly? Does it set defaults in the CPU itself? If so it should be possible to inspect and mess with these settings after startup? Martin -- %%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%% Martin Cracauer <cracauer@cons.org> http://www.cons.org/cracauer/ No warranty. This email is probably produced by one of my cats stepping on the keys. No, I don't have an infinite number of cats.
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20050624100435.A88745>