* Re: How to detect ram memory going bad?
2025-11-19 14:31 How to detect ram memory going bad? BP25
@ 2025-11-19 20:54 ` Qu Wenruo
0 siblings, 0 replies; 2+ messages in thread
From: Qu Wenruo @ 2025-11-19 20:54 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: BP25, linux-btrfs
在 2025/11/20 01:01, BP25 写道:
> Hello I'm writing to this mailing list as suggested by the btrfs docs. I
> wanted to ask how to detect and mitigate ram memory going bad when using
> BTRFS? Because the 'Hardware Considerations' the BTRFS manual suggest in
> this scenario to run memtest; but this is probs more like right after
> installing new ram.
You should always do a stress test after hardware modification.
And it's always recommended using things like memtest86+ which is a raw
UEFI payload, with minimal memory reserved, so that almost all RAM can
be properly tested.
Memtester can be executed as a user space program but it can not test
the space reserved by the kernel.
Considering how small the space reserved by the kernel, it's still a
worthy solution, but it will still take a lot of memory (if you want to
test as many memory as possible).
For the timing:
If installing new ram, always run a memtest.
If overcloking/changing DIMM timming, always run a memtest.
Finally, backup is always recommended, no matter what.
> Is there any BTRFS tool, perhaps to run
> periodically, that can help me detect bad ram hence mitigate the
> consequences? There is a webpage called 'Will ZFS and non-ECC RAM kill
> your data?' where it's suggested that ZFS scrub effectively detects bad
> ram
I doubt, because bad ram can easily corrupt your metadata/data, and the
same bad content is written to disk.
Furthermore the checksum will still match (calculated using the bad
metadata/data), thus it's impossible to detect no matter what.
And bad RAM can happen at any random byte, if it's some core kernel
structure, you're doomed anyway.
> (when at least two copies of the same file and/or metadata are
> stored, and I wonder if there are other assumptions here...), but I'm
> new to btrfs and I wonder if the reasoning can be applied to btrfs as
> well, and how effective of a mitigation it would actually provide. OS is
> GNU (Guix) and I think can't use ECC because I suspect my X200
> motherboards wouldn't support it?
>
> Please CC: or BCC: me cause I'm not subscribed.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread