Jon Masters wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-12-18 at 17:06 +0000, Matthew Bloch wrote:
>
>> I can see a few potential problems, but since my understanding of the
>> low-level memory mapping is muddy at best, I won't speculate; I'd just
>> appreciate any more expert views on whether this does work, or could be
>> made to work.
>
> Yo,
>
> I don't think your testing approach is thorough enough. Clearly (knowing
> your line of business - as a virtual machine provider), you want to do
> pre-production testing as part of your provisioning. I would suggest
> instead of using mlock() from userspace of simply writing a kernel
> module that does this for every page of available memory.
Yes this is to improve the efficiency of server burn-ins. I would
consider a kernel module, but I still wouldn't be able to test the
memory in which the kernel is sitting, which is my problem. I'm not
sure even a kernel module could reliably test the memory in which it is
residing (memtest86+ relocates itself to do this). Also I don't see how
userspace testing is any less thorough than doing it in the kernel; I
just need a creative way of accessing every single page of memory.
I may do some experiments with the memmap args, some bad RAM and
shuffling it between DIMM sockets when I have the time :)
--
Matthew
--
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]
