From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org ([208.92.234.80] helo=lists.gentoo.org) by finch.gentoo.org with esmtp (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1NfwV5-0005mE-Ch for garchives@archives.gentoo.org; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:28:07 +0000 Received: from pigeon.gentoo.org (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with SMTP id A6AF8E09DB; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:27:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: from mail-yw0-f175.google.com (mail-yw0-f175.google.com [209.85.211.175]) by pigeon.gentoo.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 88195E09DB for ; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 14:27:07 +0000 (UTC) Received: by ywh5 with SMTP id 5so2392407ywh.11 for ; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:27:07 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:received:message-id:date:from :user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references:in-reply-to :content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=IaRoJhCmU2HurMEVmf6JF6yEasCjYuuXVheNDXvrthw=; b=im4a9Cmks26ArbfGSxsNdvzEtHCeHejVVVcGC21l/uyeBRkfxOEgEe/7mb4J6NjUtd K/Lbdf9EIJsIIWaa7iKY8c458tfdOiiyGD1Gaiuo7y+M+fVw23CJBPuIqT7KZNgDFiwv JoU3PP4Ye7PiJG3ERtdt+Ntp6vqSSO38CgdTs= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:subject:references :in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=gjqWTlLaoXV/fs5QMCqvBbdohAVNDHclwRVjMqvSpPuPU31WVyphKJAKy+7+i3tUzO wF+XzW4AdqGppl6XDkF3nrOP+dpkQKvkbVmMCMVmYKNahUI/00Qd7PEmepXGp+nCUAIx x0lGJtDskSdziUYQGDyM1DvZkBn4TeOZAIico= Received: by 10.150.234.21 with SMTP id g21mr2386643ybh.209.1265984827260; Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:27:07 -0800 (PST) Received: from ?192.168.1.1? (adsl-0-92-152.jan.bellsouth.net [65.0.92.152]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id 4sm1369289ywd.59.2010.02.12.06.27.02 (version=SSLv3 cipher=RC4-MD5); Fri, 12 Feb 2010 06:27:03 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <4B756535.3050404@gmail.com> Date: Fri, 12 Feb 2010 08:27:01 -0600 From: Dale User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; U; Linux i686; en-US; rv:1.9.1.7) Gecko/20100205 Gentoo/2.0.2 SeaMonkey/2.0.2 Precedence: bulk List-Post: List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Subscribe: List-Id: Gentoo Linux mail X-BeenThere: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Reply-to: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org MIME-Version: 1.0 To: gentoo-user@lists.gentoo.org Subject: Re: [gentoo-user] Ramifications of memtest86 References: <20100212085453.GA1207@muc.de> <201002121050.46463.alan.mckinnon@gmail.com> <20100212112221.GA1422@muc.de> <20100212124330.GB1422@muc.de> <4B754D02.3010700@gmail.com> <20100212132335.GC1422@muc.de> In-Reply-To: <20100212132335.GC1422@muc.de> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Archives-Salt: 3a26335c-afbe-4160-8421-ec57c2ed392d X-Archives-Hash: 0ab206eb68d9ecf86a0eda0ab7f109ee chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties: > Hi, Dale, > > On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 06:43:46AM -0600, Dale wrote: > >> chrome://messenger/locale/messengercompose/composeMsgs.properties: >> >>> On Fri, Feb 12, 2010 at 11:22:21AM +0000, Alan Mackenzie wrote: >>> > > >>>> When I run memtest86 from the gentoo boot disk, it signals millions >>>> of failures in b11 of 32 bit words. >>>> > > >>>> I'll try unplugging and replugging these. >>>> > >>> No help. :-( >>> > >>> No matter how I plug in the RAM (4 combinations of 2 sticks into 2 >>> pairs of slots) it is always b11 which fails and always at an address >>> ending in (hex) 0 or 8. >>> > >>> How is this DDR3 Ram organised? Is each stick 64 bits wide, or are >>> they 32 bits wide, being accessed by the motherboard pairwisely? If >>> the latter, I would have exected the failure to move to address ....4 >>> and ....C when I swap the two sticks. Am I being prematurely >>> pessimistic in thinking the motherboard might be the fault? >>> > > >> Sounds to me like the mobo may have issues. If swapping the ram around >> doesn't move the error, then the chips on the mobo that connect to the >> ram may be bad. >> > So the RAM sticks are each 32 bits wide, then? > I run 32 bit here. Mine doesn't care where they are but yours may be different. > >> I would still rule out power issues if you can. A bad power supply, or >> a weak one, can cause some pretty weird problems. >> > The power supply is brand new, from a reputable manufacturer. Surely if > the power supply were dicky, I'd get RAM errors in some other bit > position inside a 32-bit word. Or maybe the RAM into which memtest86 is > loaded is also faulty. ;-( > > >> Dale >> > Where the error is could depend on a single transistor that is maybe not as sensitive as the others. It's sort of like a chain. It's only as strong as its weakest link. It could be that whatever is going wrong could be right on the edge of others not working either. The one that is failing is just the first if it is a power problem. That's where the power problem thought comes from. Have you had a look here for well tested power supplies? http://www.overclockers.com/forums/showthread.php?t=458204 That said, it could be a lot of things. It could be a bad chip on the mobo, a piece of dust in the wrong place or any number of other things. It's finding it that is so much fun. I would also check to see if it is a heat related issue. If it runs fine cold, that could point to the "dust" theory since it is consistently broke. If it only does it when hot, then that could be a chip problem. Again, lots of things it could be. So far, everybody has replied with good ideas to check. There are lots of them. Dale :-) :-)