[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 02:46:17 -0600
From: "Jeffrey V. Merkey" <jmerkey@...fmountaingroup.com>
To: paul.pinault@...k91.com
CC: Chris Snook <csnook@...hat.com>, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Data corruption
paul wrote:
If you remove memory and it goes away it probably is related to ECC
issues. Replace the upper 2GB of memory -- it appears to
have a defect. If it persists after replacing the memory, then it may
be software related. Doesn't sound like it though. Sounds like the
same problem I have seen.
Jeff
>Hi, thank you for your answer, actually I removed 2Gb of physical memory and
>the problem gone away .. but my system needs 4Gb.
>
>I reproduce it under Xen and without xen (on a standard kernel) I can't tell
>you how mutch difference I have betwwen files, regarding a 4 month system
>running on these condition, I think the number of errors are rare but
>existing, during my tests with 100M files I did not get a lot of error, so we
>can assume 2 or 3 bytes in error in 300M files... (expectation)
>
>I try to avaoid it by disabeling memory relocation on my MB ... in that case
>the system only detect 2.8G (and Linux too), The probem still there.
>
>It seems to be based on an Asus P5B-VM problem as this one have a lot of with
>4Gb... But it should be certified on Windows up to 8Gb... (but I did not have
>that strange OS to check). So a workaround should exists.
>
>
>Le mercredi 8 août 2007 01:57, vous avez écrit :
>
>
>>paul wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Since 2-3 month I have some random data corruption on my Linux server,
>>>after checking disks independently (i'm using raid1on 2 sata disk, the
>>>problem is the same w/o raid) and memory, hardware simce to be out of
>>>cause...
>>>
>>>Here is my problem:
>>>=> head --bytes=300m /dev/urandom > test
>>>=> for i in `seq 0 9` ; do cp test test$i ; done
>>>=> md5sum test*
>>>I got :
>>>014666c728c9e3b8299579fae499864a test
>>>014666c728c9e3b8299579fae499864a test0
>>>333fd93d093ac612cd8d5f65628f734e test1
>>>1ab6ee68c6a7d9ff5a05f9d63f0f6df6 test2
>>>96e96483e3175a59c9c05b6720514e1e test3
>>>014666c728c9e3b8299579fae499864a test4
>>>b24dbccc9f4831f8825ab4a55a3be4aa test5
>>>8493efc9c14e4b5c162ac23696fbc16a test6
>>>6a5f4301f66d0379049d79d0e14e2a87 test7
>>>2c81cfa1c3a03aba134574922ee5d75c test8
>>>2ea15c8392bfd0123472a80125bb3abe test9
>>>
>>>^^^ that sounds really bad for my data :(
>>>
>>>
>>It does indeed. Can you try comparing the data to see precisely how much
>>differs between the versions? md5sums don't distinguish between a
>>single-bit error and a block or page-sized error, but the distinction is
>>critical in determining what broke.
>>
>>Can you reproduce this on a recent upstream baremetal (non-Xen) kernel? If
>>so, does it go away when you boot with mem=3000M?
>>
>> -- Chris
>>
>>
>
>-
>To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
>the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
>More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
>Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>
>
>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
Powered by blists - more mailing lists