From owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG  Tue Mar 22 20:19:24 2011
Return-Path: <owner-freebsd-arch@FreeBSD.ORG>
Delivered-To: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:4f8:fff6::34])
	by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id E285D106564A
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:19:24 +0000 (UTC)
	(envelope-from mj@feral.com)
Received: from ns1.feral.com (ns1.feral.com [192.67.166.1])
	by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id B352A8FC12
	for <freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>; Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:19:24 +0000 (UTC)
Received: from ghanima.in1.lcl (ghanima.in1.lcl [172.16.1.87])
	by ns1.feral.com (8.14.4/8.14.3) with ESMTP id p2MJsnPD012168;
	Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:54:49 -0800 (PST) (envelope-from mj@feral.com)
Message-ID: <4D88FE89.1060900@feral.com>
Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 12:54:49 -0700
From: Matthew Jacob <mj@feral.com>
User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (X11/20101213)
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: John Baldwin <jhb@freebsd.org>
References: <alpine.BSF.2.00.1103221634241.6104@ai.fobar.qr>
	<201103221551.14289.jhb@freebsd.org>
In-Reply-To: <201103221551.14289.jhb@freebsd.org>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender IP whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.6
	(ns1.feral.com [192.67.166.1]);
	Tue, 22 Mar 2011 11:54:49 -0800 (PST)
Cc: "Bjoern A. Zeeb" <bz@freebsd.org>, freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
Subject: Re: kernel memory checks on boot vs. boot time
X-BeenThere: freebsd-arch@freebsd.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5
Precedence: list
List-Id: Discussion related to FreeBSD architecture <freebsd-arch.freebsd.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-arch>
List-Post: <mailto:freebsd-arch@freebsd.org>
List-Help: <mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-arch>,
	<mailto:freebsd-arch-request@freebsd.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 22 Mar 2011 20:19:25 -0000

John Baldwin wrote:
>  
> Do other platforms bother with these sorts of memory tests?  If not I'd vote 
> to just drop it.  I think this mattered more when you didn't have things like 
> SMAP (so you had to guess at where memory ended sometimes).  Also, modern 
> server class x86 machines generally support ECC RAM which will trigger a 
> machine check if there is a problem.  I doubt that the early checks are 
> catching anything even for the non-ECC case.
>
> If nothing else, I would definitely drop this from amd64 (all those systems 
> have SMAP and machine check support, etc.).
>
>   
Memory checks are definitely still useful. Loading the linux mem tester 
has helped find lots of problems, even on so-called modern machines. I'd 
voter for leaving this as an option.