Messages in this thread | | | From | "Flynn, Jason, FLYNNJS" <> | Subject | Re: Linux & ECC memory | Date | Fri, 15 Nov 96 08:39:00 UCT |
| |
Eric Wrote : >It is much more interesting to me to have the kernel tell me that a >correction was made (soft error) so that I have the opportunity to replace >it before it degrades and a hard error occurs.
Is this likely? My understanding of a soft error is that your memory got hit by some radiation or affected by a power glitch and that they are random instances not anything to do with a dodgy bit - therefore unlikely to happen again.
If a bit is dodgy in itself and is on it's on the blink then this should be classed as a hard fault from the outset.
Hard to tell the difference, I know, but just my penneth worth...
(Just as an aside, what about these smart memory modules ? They detect a word that is alway failing its check then they re-map to some spare words. This is totally transparent and these things should go in a MB without and chipset wizardry...)
J
| |