Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 10:12:17 +0100 From: David Malone <dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie> To: Matthew Dillon <dillon@apollo.backplane.com> Cc: Adrian Penisoara <ady@warpnet.ro>, freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG, freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: [Patches avail?] Re: MMAP() in STABLE/CURRENT ... Message-ID: <19991008101217.A24152@gosset.maths.tcd.ie> In-Reply-To: <199910071709.KAA95541@apollo.backplane.com> References: <Pine.BSF.4.10.9910071843290.16490-100000@ady.warpnet.ro> <199910071709.KAA95541@apollo.backplane.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Thu, Oct 07, 1999 at 10:09:23AM -0700, Matthew Dillon wrote: > Intel's ECC implementation is not perfect (1), but it's good enough to > catch these sorts of problems. Just as an interesting side note, we had a motherboard which supported ECC ram and had ECC ram in it and which was crashing. Eventually we discovered that every 8th byte in page aligned 4KB chunks was becomming corrupted. We replaced the ram and saw no improvement, and then got a replacement motherboard. As far as I could see the only significant difference between the new and old motherboard was the addition of a heat sink to the memory controler chip. The machine is now perfectly happy. So it seems that ECC isn't enough if your memory controler is too hot! David. To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-current" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?19991008101217.A24152>