On 12/31/05, Mark v Wolher <[email protected]> wrote:
> Jesper Juhl wrote:
> > On 12/31/05, Mark v Wolher <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> >>g'morning !
> >>
> >>the memtest86 went 40 times over the memory, no errors detected.
> >>
> >
> > Give memtest86+ a spin (http://www.memtest.org/) as well. memtest86 is
> > good, but I've found in the past that memtest86+ sometimes finds
> > errors that memtest86 does not, so giving both a sin fo an extended
> > period of time is usually a good idea.
> > Also, make sure you enable all the tests of both tools.
>
> Hi Jesper,
>
> Oh i thought they were the same, i used memtest86+ which comes with
> debian and not the "older" memtest86.
>
> Right now i booted the kernel with nomce since one never knows with dell
Surpressing MCE's (Machine Check Exceptions) is a really bad idea
usually. MCE's indicate a hardware problem, so unless it's known that
a certain MCE is reported wrongly they should *not* be ignored.
--
Jesper Juhl <[email protected]>
Don't top-post http://www.catb.org/~esr/jargon/html/T/top-post.html
Plain text mails only, please http://www.expita.com/nomime.html
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to [email protected]
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
[Index of Archives]
[Kernel Newbies]
[Netfilter]
[Bugtraq]
[Photo]
[Stuff]
[Gimp]
[Yosemite News]
[MIPS Linux]
[ARM Linux]
[Linux Security]
[Linux RAID]
[Video 4 Linux]
[Linux for the blind]
[Linux Resources]
