log spamming

log spamming

[Gene Heskett]

Greetings;

I just rebooted to a new config of 2.6.24, basically trying to strip out the 
building of modules I don't use.  And I enabled a couple of checks that 
weren't checked in the kernel-hacking menu.  .config posted on request.

Now the messages log is being spammed at 2-5 second intervals by these:
Feb  1 10:41:08 coyote kernel: [ 3085.501037] MCE: The hardware reports a non 
fatal, correctable incident occurred on CPU 0.
Feb  1 10:41:08 coyote kernel: [ 3085.501042] Bank 1: d400400000000152
Feb  1 10:41:08 coyote kernel: [ 3085.501045] MCE: The hardware reports a non 
fatal, correctable incident occurred on CPU 0.
Feb  1 10:41:08 coyote kernel: [ 3085.501048] Bank 2: d40040000000017a

Always the same 2 addresses.  Is this telling me I should be running memtest86 
for a couple of cycles?

Thanks.

-- 
Cheers, Gene
"There are four boxes to be used in defense of liberty:
 soap, ballot, jury, and ammo. Please use in that order."
-Ed Howdershelt (Author)
"It is the creationists who blasphemously are claiming that God is cheating
 us in a stupid way."
-- J. W. Nienhuys

Re: log spamming

[Chris Snook]

Gene Heskett wrote:
> Greetings;
> 
> I just rebooted to a new config of 2.6.24, basically trying to strip out the 
> building of modules I don't use.  And I enabled a couple of checks that 
> weren't checked in the kernel-hacking menu.  .config posted on request.
> 
> Now the messages log is being spammed at 2-5 second intervals by these:
> Feb  1 10:41:08 coyote kernel: [ 3085.501037] MCE: The hardware reports a non 
> fatal, correctable incident occurred on CPU 0.
> Feb  1 10:41:08 coyote kernel: [ 3085.501042] Bank 1: d400400000000152
> Feb  1 10:41:08 coyote kernel: [ 3085.501045] MCE: The hardware reports a non 
> fatal, correctable incident occurred on CPU 0.
> Feb  1 10:41:08 coyote kernel: [ 3085.501048] Bank 2: d40040000000017a
> 
> Always the same 2 addresses.  Is this telling me I should be running memtest86 
> for a couple of cycles?

Those two addresses are in the same cache line, but they are *not* in the same 
128-bit ECC block.  This is probably a northbridge problem, not a RAM problem. 
It's not necessarily a hardware problem.  I wouldn't be surprised if you swapped 
CPUs and still got the same result, due to BIOS misconfiguration.

	-- Chris