Date: Thu, 13 Apr 1995 08:35:33 -0700 From: David Greenman <davidg@Root.COM> To: Branson Matheson <branson@dvals1.larc.nasa.gov> Cc: pechter@stars.sed.monmouth.army.mil (william pechter ILEX), FreeBSD-hackers@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: 940804 (vaporware ;-) reboots the system either: Message-ID: <199504131535.IAA00181@corbin.Root.COM> In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 13 Apr 95 11:28:27 EDT." <199504131528.LAA26412@dvals1.larc.nasa.gov>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
>> > The memory test was removed because it took too long on machines with a >> > lot of memory (a lot is >= 64MB) and wasn't effective in finding real memory >> > problems anyway. >> >> Well, it fixed my wife's OS/2 installation crash problem and her >> Linux sig 11's. Turned out to be bad memory. > > > I would like to see this left in the system as an option to configure into > the kernel... we could even add a hack to it so that the check can be a bit > more visiable... like the /|\- thingy or even the dots across the screen. > mabey a count out of the memeory... and possibly a generated report when it > finds a bad part... If there is interest in this... I will clean-up > the code I have and add some of the other features mentioned above.. for > now I have the dots. I don't want memory test code in the kernel, but it might be nice to have it in our /boot when we implement it. The problem with this of course is that it leads people to a false sense of confidence. Many memory problems require hours of testing before they show up. There are already many good memory test programs out there for PCs that do a much more credible job than we could ever do as part of a bootstrap. -DG
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?199504131535.IAA00181>