Re: [PROPOSAL] Coping with random bit errors
H. Peter Anvin (hpa@transmeta.com)
11 Oct 1997 00:59:09 GMT
Followup to: <199710102340.JAA31322@vindaloo.atnf.CSIRO.AU>
By author: Richard Gooch <rgooch@atnf.CSIRO.AU>
In newsgroup: linux.dev.kernel
>
> While the above scheme is not as robust as proper ECC memory, it has
> the distinct advantage of being cheap (free:-) and should provide some
> level of protection against random bit errors. I shudder to think what
> other bit errors have crept into my source tree which don't prevent
> compiling :-(
> Anyway, I'd like to get some reaction from those who know more about
> the page cache implementation as to what they think of this idea?
>
Hardly free... you're spending memory and *lots* of CPU cycles, which
really drags down your performance/price ratio :(
The main problem with it, from a technical standpoint, is that unlike
ECC all you know is that a page was corrupted, so you have to throw it
out. If it was dirty, or in use, what do you do?
-hpa
--
PGP: 2047/2A960705 BA 03 D3 2C 14 A8 A8 BD 1E DF FE 69 EE 35 BD 74
See http://www.zytor.com/~hpa/ for web page and full PGP public key
I am Bahá'í -- ask me about it or see http://www.bahai.org/
"To love another person is to see the face of God." -- Les Misérables