Re: Oops with 2.4.23

[Jesper Juhl]

On Mon, 22 Dec 2003, Chris Frey wrote:

> On Sun, Dec 21, 2003 at 06:17:00PM -0800, Barry K. Nathan wrote:
> > On Sat, Dec 20, 2003 at 12:35:24AM +0100, Maciej Zenczykowski wrote:
> > > you did run memtest for a minimum dozen hours? sometimes it takes that
> > > long to find errors...
> >
> > On one machine (with a bad power supply, as it turned out) it took
> > memtest86 almost 18 hours to report an error. So 12 hours isn't enough
> > either.
> >
> > (On a related note, one machine that I tested with mprime's Torture Test
> > <http://www.mersenne.org/> took I think close to 43 hours to show a
> > failure. In that case I don't know if the failure was the CPU or the
> > motherboard, because in the end both failed on that system.)
>
> At what point do people start suspecting the kernel?
>
> I mean, I would hope the linux kernel is not so badly written as to stress
> the machine 24/7.  So after 12 hours of running memtest86 with clean
> results, does that not begin to point to a software error rather than
> hardware?
>
Personally I expect my hardware to be able to survive being stressed 24/7.
I'm not saying the kernel does that, but if it did I would consider my
hardware broken if it didn't survive.

/Jesper Juhl

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/