Stefan Reinauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > * Eric W. Biederman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [020423 15:16]: > > I got annoyed with memtest86 a while ago and started scratching itches. > > > > I have a preliminary patch available that I will send to Chris Brady > > as soon as I do as I sleep on it and can do a final review with > > a fresh mind. > > > > As of 2.9 memtest86 does BIOS calls to get the memory size, this > > broke netbooting. > > At the moment I'm using etherboot without memtest86. How is this > approached? Are both of them seperate payloads? Are there any other > advantages, except being able to test memory?
Generally the usage is that you netboot memtest86, the real advantage lies in being able to test memory. Given that memory setup is one of the trickier things to write with LinuxBIOS running memtest86 is a handy test case. Beyond that it is one of the few stanalone programs for x86. With this last round of changes memtest86 is running best of breed software, techniques. It goes into 32bit protected mode before testing to see if it is running on LinuxBIOS or the PCBIOS. It has code from ld.so to allow it to relocate anywhwere in memory. It handles exceptions. etc, etc. Which makes it a good template piece of code. Plus given the basic LinuxBIOS stance that doing memory testing at boottime is a waste of time, this gives a memory testing solution that can detect most bad ram, for when we need it. Eric
