From owner-freebsd-stable Fri Oct 8 2:12:23 1999 Delivered-To: freebsd-stable@freebsd.org Received: from salmon.maths.tcd.ie (salmon.maths.tcd.ie [134.226.81.11]) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with SMTP id B88FC14F7D; Fri, 8 Oct 1999 02:12:18 -0700 (PDT) (envelope-from dwmalone@maths.tcd.ie) Received: from gosset.maths.tcd.ie by salmon.maths.tcd.ie with SMTP id ; 8 Oct 1999 10:12:17 +0100 (BST) Date: Fri, 8 Oct 1999 10:12:17 +0100 From: David Malone To: Matthew Dillon Cc: Adrian Penisoara , 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> References: <199910071709.KAA95541@apollo.backplane.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Mailer: Mutt 1.0pre3i In-Reply-To: <199910071709.KAA95541@apollo.backplane.com> Sender: owner-freebsd-stable@FreeBSD.ORG Precedence: bulk X-Loop: FreeBSD.ORG 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-stable" in the body of the message