Xref: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware:60794 comp.os.linux:37714
Newsgroups: comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware,comp.os.linux
Subject: Re: Debugging possible hardware problems
References: <1r0rslINNnv2@senator-bedfellow.MIT.EDU> <1993Apr20.151405.12480@serval.net.wsu.edu>
Organization: Andrews University
From: hernandz@andrews.edu (Aldy Hernandez)
Path: cantaloupe.srv.cs.cmu.edu!rochester!udel!darwin.sura.net!bogus.sura.net!howland.reston.ans.net!zaphod.mps.ohio-state.edu!caen!destroyer!gumby!news.cs.andrews.edu!hernandz
Message-ID: <735421689wkn13397@susan>
Date: 21 Apr 93 19:48:09 GMT
Lines: 27

>>I suspect the external cache, but I have no real evidence for this.
>>
>>	. Suggestions about the cause of the problem
>
>	Bad memory, bad motherboard, bad cache.
>>
>>	. Suggestions about how to debug the problem
>>
>
>	turn off cache.

GCC and other big programs seemed to crash about 15% of the time for me.
gcc gave something like "program as got fatal signal 11" and when doing
anything past the complexity of elvis, kermit, etc, I got kernel general
protection faults at *least* once a session.

I disabled my cache as suggested, and bingo, Linux is as stable as a rock
(it hasn't given me a core dump or kernel error yet).

Does any one know why the cache would do something like this?

Aldy
--
hernandz@andrews.edu
--------------------
If programmers are paid by the hour, how do you suppose the array
X [1..1000] is initialized?-- "More Programming Pearls"
