SUMMARY: Panic on parity error

From: Bill Morrow (morrow@cns.ucalgary.ca)
Date: Mon Dec 13 1993 - 14:13:57 CST


On Friday, I wrote:
> Our home file server (Sparc 1+, SunOS 4.1.3, 16MB, internal Quantom 105,
> external Seagate ST42100 ) panicked last night:
>
> Dec 10 03:27:34 cns16 vmunix: Parity error reported at 0xffa37330, actual address is 0xffa37334.
> Dec 10 03:27:34 cns16 vmunix: Parity Error, ctx = 0x6, virt addr = 0xffa37334
> Dec 10 03:27:34 cns16 vmunix: pme = e20022ba, phys addr = 22ba334
> Dec 10 03:27:34 cns16 vmunix: Parity Error Register 91<ERROR,CHECK,ERR24>
> Dec 10 03:27:34 cns16 vmunix: bad module/chip at: U678

Thanks for the speedy responses from

From: davec@cs.ust.hk (Dave Curado)
From: Dave Fetrow <fetrow@biostat.washington.edu>
From: joshin@sei.com (Josh Goldsmith)
From: perryh@pluto.rain.com (Perry Hutchison)
From: feldt@phyast.nhn.uoknor.edu (Andy Feldt)
From: holle@austin.wireline.slb.com
From: "Jon Mellott" <jon@alpha.ee.ufl.edu>

who were unanimous in saying U678 is one of the SIMMs. What they disagreed on
was the severity of the problem. I will go with the less reactive viewpoint,
blame the panic on a stray alpha particle, and wait for another occurence or
two before replacing the SIMM.

Bill



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Sep 28 2001 - 23:08:32 CDT