Messages in this thread | | | Date | Fri, 07 Nov 2003 19:47:43 -0800 | From | Samuel Flory <> | Subject | Re: CPU-Test similar to Memtest? |
| |
bill davidsen wrote: > In article <1067379433.6281.575.camel@tubarao>, > Thayne Harbaugh <tharbaugh@lnxi.com> wrote: > > | On Tue, 2003-10-28 at 09:05, Robert L. Harris wrote: > | > I'm going to run MEMTEST today when I get home and get a chance to make > | > a bootable CD > | > | Memtest86 is good, but it isn't as good as it could be. Many times I > | have seen it run 24 hours without error even though the the system has > | bad memory. > | > | > but I'm wondering if there might be a "CPUTEST" or such > | > utility anyone knows of that'll poke and prod a dual athalon real well > | > and make sure I don't have a flaky cpu. > | > | Run Linpack (or other computationally intensive program) while > | monitoring ECC errors with either > | http://www.anime.net/~goemon/linux-ecc/files/ > | or > | ftp://ftp.lnxi.com/pub/bluesmoke > > I agree with almost everything you said, but I have seen cases in which > no CPU use would generate an error, but using heavy DMA io in addition > triggered the problem. If all else fails add your favorite disk test.
Cpuburn is a good test to run on x86's. That said I've only seen it fail in 2 systems out of ~20,000. Generally cpu erros will crash your system before the error is printed to the screen.
Also compiling your kernel in a loop is a good way to shake loose cpu, and memory issue. I've often found this finds errors much quicker many memory tests.
You might want to try ctcs. "Make ; "./new-burn -t" http://sourceforge.net/projects/va-ctcs/ -- Once you have their hardware. Never give it back. (The First Rule of Hardware Acquisition) Sam Flory <sflory@rackable.com>
- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
| |