I'd like for BadRAM to be included in the list of kernel patches in package sys-kernel/gentoo-dev-sources . BadRAM's objective is to allow the use of memory that have a few bad bytes safely by preventing programs from allocating the bad adresses. More details & patch at: http://rick.vanrein.org/linux/badram/ Reproducible: Always Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3.
Should one really encourage people to use bad RAM? Personally I don't think this should be included, since it will be yet-another-patch and IMHO that patch does not give so many advantages compared to the risks of introducing a new patch. I think it's better to tell people to buy new RAM, and if they don't have the money, then they can patch the kernel themselves.
I don't like the untested part of the latest patch. Unleashing this patch on lots of gentoo-dev-sources with it being so untested is not what I consider a good idea. I dolike the idea of the patch though. I'd rather have this put forth to mainstream where they can pick it apart.
It has been picked apart, and upstream doesn't include it for good reason :)
I suggested it since I've used it for some time on a 2.4 kernel on another comp, and now with the 2.6 kernel on my main comp, and I never had any problem with it. But I am curious to know what was found wrong with it when it was picked apart (just curious).
hmm, I just found out about this patch and it is really great! have saved me a lot of money and an old 386 computer ;) Mandrake, Debian, Caldera include it by default, so really it can't be that bad? I would like to see proof of that... "I think it's better to tell people to buy new RAM, and if they don't have the money, then they can patch the kernel themselves." <-- that is just stupid imo, why buy 256mb of new ram when 4kb of them is faulty? :S
*** Bug 127616 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
*** Bug 216067 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***
