LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Hardware
User Name
Password
Linux - Hardware This forum is for Hardware issues.
Having trouble installing a piece of hardware? Want to know if that peripheral is compatible with Linux?

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 11-02-2005, 01:29 PM   #1
slackhack
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Distribution: Arch, Debian, Slack
Posts: 1,016

Rep: Reputation: 47
added ram - system unstable, segfaults


i just added 512 PC3200 to my 2x256MB PC3200, and it's giving me major problems.

motherboard is nforce2, and i'm not overclocking anything right now. the memory is coincidentally the same brand as the 2x256, all buffalo tech, pc3200 cas 2.5.

i had the 2x256 set at the motherboard's "auto" and "turbo" settings (2.5-2-2-6), it said dual channel DDR400 when it booted so i guess it was running dual channel okay, and it gave me no problems at all. i could overclock the fsb to 200 and it was fine.

with the 512 stick added, at turbo settings it crashes all my applications with segfaults. i read something on LQ about specifically setting the ram speed instead of leaving it on auto if things aren't working, but if i change the ddr % setting even to to 120% it won't post (which at 166mhz is less than ddr400, is that right? i can't even get the rated speed?). i tried raising the cas to 3 (3-3-3-7) but it also wouldn't post. the "optimal" setting (2.5-3-3-7) boots (which i completely don't get, since it won't boot with the exact same settings except for cas 3) but it's a little unstable (screensaver coming on out of the blue, etc.) when i kill X there are all kinds of screensaver and other errors that say something about "undefined symbols" i think.

all the memory doesn't show up in free, either:
Code:
[6] sero:~ $ free -o
             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:        906316     154984     751332          0       9480      85984
Swap:       987988          0     987988

[7] sero:~ $ free -om
             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:           885        151        733          0          9         83
Swap:          964          0        964
where's the rest of the MBs? it's detected at post, but not in linux -- why would that be?

i ran memtest for a couple of hours, and it didn't return any errors. i'll probably run it overnight, but i need my PC today. i thought i should try adding more voltage to it, but why should it need more voltage at lowest settings? maybe it is bad?
 
Old 11-02-2005, 02:03 PM   #2
fouldsy
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2002
Location: St Louis, MO
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 1,284

Rep: Reputation: 47
Try a memtest overnight for 10-12 hours to let it have a good few passes through each check. If the memory is both the same brand and speed, doesn't seem like a configuration issue, but more likely a bad memory module. Have you tried removing your original ram stick and only leaving the new one installed and seeing if the same problems persist?
 
Old 11-02-2005, 02:17 PM   #3
slackhack
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Distribution: Arch, Debian, Slack
Posts: 1,016

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 47
Quote:
Originally posted by fouldsy
Try a memtest overnight for 10-12 hours to let it have a good few passes through each check. If the memory is both the same brand and speed, doesn't seem like a configuration issue, but more likely a bad memory module. Have you tried removing your original ram stick and only leaving the new one installed and seeing if the same problems persist?
haven't done that yet b/c i needed to do some stuff today and didn't have time to experiment with taking modules in and out, etc. right now i'm compiling a new kernel with highmem support, as i noticed my old kernel config didn't have that enabled. that might account for the "missing" memory, at least. then i'll let memtest run overnight with just the 512 stick, see what that shows. thanks.
 
Old 11-02-2005, 02:25 PM   #4
Back_to_Linux
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: PARIS
Distribution: Mandriva 10.0 Communoty
Posts: 117

Rep: Reputation: 15
hello,
are you try to use a 512 bank only ?
May be your mother board need to adress the same range of adresses, at the twice 256, acces isn't the same vs 512 'sticks'.
May be the twice consumns more. or, if it's the same mark, the technologie isn't the same !!
 
Old 11-02-2005, 02:51 PM   #5
slackhack
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Distribution: Arch, Debian, Slack
Posts: 1,016

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 47
Quote:
Originally posted by Back_to_Linux
hello,
are you try to use a 512 bank only ?
May be your mother board need to adress the same range of adresses, at the twice 256, acces isn't the same vs 512 'sticks'.
May be the twice consumns more. or, if it's the same mark, the technologie isn't the same !!
what does that mean, address the same range of addresses? is there a bios setting i can tweak to manipulate that? or maybe you mean i should run 2x512 instead of 512 + 2x256?

it's possible the technology isn't the same. i had never really heard of buffalo tech, but someone recommended it to me a couple of years ago, when i got the 2x256. it's been great up till now, it could OC 200FSB at turbo, and a little more with added voltage. maybe the newer stuff is from a different factory, different process, etc. all are labeled PC3200 cas 2.5, however.

recompiled a kernel, 2.6.14, still 0 highmem.
Code:
[2] sero:~ $ dmesg |grep mem
Memory: 906072k/917504k available (2060k kernel code, 10980k reserved, 569k data, 160k init, 0k highmem)
PInS memtype = 5
Freeing unused kernel memory: 160k freed
 
Old 11-03-2005, 03:12 PM   #6
slackhack
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Distribution: Arch, Debian, Slack
Posts: 1,016

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 47
okay, things are running better now with more voltage and slightly less aggressive timings. the nf2 board doesn't like cas3, so that was the problem there. so aside from that, i guess mostly it was just a matter of needing more voltage with the extra 512. merci!
 
Old 11-03-2005, 03:30 PM   #7
Back_to_Linux
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2005
Location: PARIS
Distribution: Mandriva 10.0 Communoty
Posts: 117

Rep: Reputation: 15
you need to see the serigraphie on the chip to know if they made by the same factory.
I know that for a factory, the chip's adressability vary. If the system are 3 chips to adress in a bank, it isn't the same algorythm to adress 6 chip in 2 bank, rigth ? your mother board and her bios don't communicate the same maner to the 512' bank, than they with the too 256 bank. It's what i meand. Even, we have the simple mind to aks uselves this the same, the system create a map of the memory to acces it. Phisycaly, this map reside in the chip, you understand what i mean? Try, like a precedent post says you, to use you 512 memory stick alone in your box make some "hard" test to know if all the chip in the stick are valid for first, and to know, for second, the maner the chip is build (true rate, clear voltage, number of chipset, vendor, and so on). make the same thing with your precedents stick alone, and compare their compatibility. An evolution in a chip, even with the same factory, may be represent some architecture different, because the assembler have a custom chip's programmation.
 
Old 11-03-2005, 04:29 PM   #8
slackhack
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jun 2004
Distribution: Arch, Debian, Slack
Posts: 1,016

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 47
thanks, BtL. it's still reporting as under a gig, does anyone know why that might be?

Code:
[2] sero:~ $ free -om
             total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:           885        199        685          0         10        102
Swap:          964          0        964
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
9.2 partitions not added into a 10.1 file system choco66 Mandriva 1 12-10-2004 05:09 PM
Find all system files altered or added by me suguru Linux - Newbie 3 09-19-2004 01:18 PM
Added RAM now kernel panic? Risc91 Linux - Laptop and Netbook 6 09-09-2003 08:38 AM
File system upset by added IDE drive jerrymc Linux - Hardware 6 07-11-2002 12:53 AM
Where is How-TO on formating new HD that will be added to system bankrupt Linux - General 5 07-15-2001 03:31 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Hardware

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:19 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration