From: Ed Vance <EdV@macrolink.com>
To: "'Richard B. Johnson'" <root@chaos.analogic.com>
Cc: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: RE: [STATUS 2.5] October 30, 2002
Date: Fri, 1 Nov 2002 10:17:45 -0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <11E89240C407D311958800A0C9ACF7D1A33C8D@EXCHANGE> (raw)
On Fri, November 01, 2002 at 9:00 AM, Richard B. Johnson wrote:
> [...]
> The correctable ECC is supposed to be just that (correctable). It's
> supposed to be entirely transparent to the CPU/Software. An additional
> read of the affected error produces the same correction so the CPU
> will never even know. The x86 CPU/Software is only notified on an
> uncorrectable error. I don't know of any SDRAM controller that
> generates an interrupt upon a correctable error. Some store "logging"
> information internally, very difficult to get at on a running system.
>
> Given that, "scrubbing" RAM seems to be somewhat useless on a
> running system. The next write to the affected area will fix the
> ECC bits, that's what is supposed to clear up the condition.
>
Scrubbing has nothing whatever to do with reporting of correctable errors to
the CPU, even if it does the scrubbing.
Scrubbing does not happen on the basis of chance detection of correctable
errors from normal activity, because that would sometimes be too late.
Remember, the hardware only finds out about an error when the word is
accessed. There is no detection of the bit cell getting its charge altered,
and the errors are cumulative between corrections.
Scrubbing is intended to lower the probability that any given memory word
will be hit by a second error causing event (such as an alpha particle
emitted from a ceramic case) without having been accessed and corrected. The
scrub just continuously rolls through all of physical memory (at low
priority) again and again doing whatever level of access is necessary to
cause correction. This limits the maximum time between correction of any
memory word. Some memory systems automatically correct and rewrite
(atomically) on a read of a word with a single bit error. Some mainframe
memory systems do the whole ECC scrub/correction operation in hardware,
simultaneously in each bank.
The primary benefit of logging is to catch deteriorating memory cells during
periodic maintenance that either do not correct at all (single stuck bit,
single hits become uncorrectable) or that repeatedly fail over time, perhaps
due to charge leaks from long term diffusion of contaminants.
Cheers,
Ed
next reply other threads:[~2002-11-01 18:11 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 29+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2002-11-01 18:17 Ed Vance [this message]
2002-11-01 18:46 ` Malcolm Beattie
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2002-11-04 17:14 Ed Vance
2002-11-01 22:25 Ed Vance
2002-11-02 0:33 ` Werner Almesberger
2002-11-01 19:14 Ken Ryan
2002-11-01 19:56 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-11-01 21:27 ` Ken Ryan
2002-10-30 16:17 Dave Jones
2002-10-30 17:14 ` Randy.Dunlap
2002-10-31 6:22 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-10-31 10:56 ` Alan Cox
2002-10-31 16:30 ` Randy.Dunlap
2002-10-31 14:40 ` Dave Jones
2002-10-31 23:01 ` Pavel Machek
2002-11-01 14:05 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-11-01 16:49 ` Alan Cox
2002-11-01 17:00 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-11-02 12:19 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-11-04 14:31 ` Richard B. Johnson
2002-11-04 15:58 ` Eric W. Biederman
2002-10-30 15:13 Guillaume Boissiere
2002-10-30 15:55 ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
2002-10-30 22:36 ` David S. Miller
2002-10-31 2:48 ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
2002-10-31 2:44 ` David S. Miller
2002-10-31 3:07 ` kuznet
2002-10-31 3:16 ` YOSHIFUJI Hideaki / 吉藤英明
2002-10-31 3:13 ` David S. Miller
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=11E89240C407D311958800A0C9ACF7D1A33C8D@EXCHANGE \
--to=edv@macrolink.com \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=root@chaos.analogic.com \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox
all inboxes | Powered by JetHome®