[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <86802c440803211443o7bbc539fx762e06f51c6f0fdb@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 21 Mar 2008 14:43:08 -0700
From: "Yinghai Lu" <yhlu.kernel@...il.com>
To: "Jan Engelhardt" <jengelh@...putergmbh.de>
Cc: "Ingo Molnar" <mingo@...e.hu>,
"Andrew Morton" <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
"H. Peter Anvin" <hpa@...or.com>,
"kernel list" <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] x86_64: early memtest to find bad ram
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 2:22 PM, Jan Engelhardt <jengelh@...putergmbh.de> wrote:
>
> On Mar 21 2008 13:03, Ingo Molnar wrote:
> > * Yinghai Lu <yhlu.kernel.send@...il.com> wrote:
> >
> >> do simple memtest after init_memory_mapping
> >> use find_e820_area_size to find all ram range that is not reserved.
> >> and do some simple bits test to find some bad ram.
> >> if find some bad ram, use reserve_early to exclude that range.
> >
> > very nice patch! I always thought that this was the proper way to do
> > memtest - and we could in fact also do something like this after SMP
> > bringup, and hit the memory bus via multiple CPUs. [that will need a
> > different enumeration though than e820 maps]
>
> Perhaps this can even be used to provide on-the-fly badram
> patch semantics?
yes. but bad ranges can not be too many. otherwise early_res array
will overflow. then need to use memmap=nn$ss to exclude range already
found.
YH
--
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