On Fri, 18 Feb 2005, Eben King wrote:
> The 256 MB DIMM was in slot #1 (of 3), with the 512 MB DIMM in #3. I
> removed the 256 and checked the 512 alone, no errors. Fine. Maybe slot #1
> is bad? So I put the 256 in slot #2 alone, and memtest86 wouldn't run.
> Guess that DIMM is bad, or BOTH slot #1 and slot #2 are bad...
>
> I knew that 512 MB would cramp my style, and I had wanted to upgrade anyhow
> (VMware's unhappy), so I unlent that 512 MB DIMM I'd put in another
> computer.
OK, further oddities. I should expect to have 1 GB = 1024 MB RAM in my
machine, right? 512MB from before, and 512 MB from the other machine.
But, "top", "free" and "dmesg" agree that I have somewhat less. "top"
says:
Mem: 904580K av, 883632K used, 20948K free, 0K shrd, 109036K buff
"free" says:
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 904580 883448 21132 0 109072 504404
-/+ buffers/cache: 269972 634608
"dmesg | grep ^Me" says:
Memory: 904484k/917504k available (1108k kernel code, 12632k reserved, 406k
data, 96k init, 0k highmem)
904580 KB =~ 883 MB. What happened to the other 140-and-change MB? Is it
possible for a DIMM to be bad in such a way that it operates fine, but with
a lower capacity?
-- -eben ebQenW1@EtaRmpTabYayU.rIr.OcoPm home.tampabay.rr.com/hactarThey that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety. -- Ben Franklin
----------------------------------------------------------------------- This list is provided as an unmoderated internet service by Networked Knowledge Systems (NKS). Views and opinions expressed in messages posted are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of NKS or any of its employees.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.3 : Fri Aug 01 2014 - 19:22:01 EDT