No announcement yet.

sound show no operations reported in timeout period

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Sample which occurred error message re-test will PASS with cancel the memory test ite

    Sample which occurred error message re-test will PASS with cancel the memory test item

    Test sample:20 sets ,
    error message:10 sets(xp system pass)(vista 32 8 sets)(vista 64 x 2sets)

    Brand : 3 (HP , ASUS ,..etc)

    1.What you see for the memory test looks normal.

    Normal: 1. momory test use more less capacity (under 0.2G x 4 )
    2. release smoothly the RAM capacity
    Abnormal: 1.momory test use more much capacity (over 0.7G x 4 )
    2. release difficulty the RAM capacity

    2.It does look like BurnInTest is using something that is not releasing
    memory and hence the system runs out of memory.

    How to know something which runs out of memory? thanks


    • #17
      As I said, if you remove the RAM test, my suspicion is that the problem will still occur, it will just take much longer (maybe weeks) for the same problem to occur. The RAM test just speeds up the process of running out of memory, as it allocates a large percentage of available RAM.

      The way I know the system is running out of memory, is that in the log you sent us, the amount of available RAM continuously reduces over your test time. This would normally only occur if RAM is allocated and not fully deallocated (may times), this is called a memory leak. As you say this only occurs on 32-bit Vista with the HotFixes you indicate then my conclusion to date is that there is a memory leak in one of the Windows components in one of the Hotfixes.

      Specifically, in your BIT_log_090312_090352.trace file, the following lines:
      LOG NOTE: 2009-03-12 09:05:00, Memory (RAM), System Memory Total: 2045MB, Test RAM allocated 1328MB, Available: 32MB
      LOG NOTE: 2009-03-12 09:06:26, Memory (RAM), System Memory Total: 2045MB, Test RAM allocated 1300MB, Available: 51MB
      LOG NOTE: 2009-03-12 10:02:18, Memory (RAM), System Memory Total: 2045MB, Test RAM allocated 4MB, Available: 49MB

      This shows that Test RAM allcoated + Available RAM reduces continuously from about 1360MB (1328+32) to about 53MB (4+49), then the sound error occurs. The Test RAM + Available RAM should be fairly constant during the test, and certainly not reducing towards 0.

      Hence my previous suggestions as to what you should test next still are valid.

      I didn't fully understand your post, so if I missed answering something, please let me know.



      • #18
        Normal: as the picture,capacity of MemTest only use 100,416k
        ( just decrease,will not increase)

        Abnormal:as the picture,capacity of MemTest unsettled increase
        (over 1,014,272k)

        By the way,why does the capacity of MemTest not of uniform size at different NB with the same BurbInTest 6.0

        Is size of physical RAM?? (but 4G system use capacity of RAM more less than 2G system)

        can I change RAM setting of BurnInTest Preferences,to confirm the issue??
        How to set?

        RAM test mode and test pattern:
        2.Multi-Process Torture Test
        3.Address Windowing Extensions
        what are 1~3 of ram test mode meaning??


        • #19
          sorry, forget to tell you,

          when I use a large number sets to test ,uninstall hotfix or vista 64 still will appear error message.
          (20 sets have 2 set will appear)

          therefore uninstall hotfix or vista 64 are not root cause.

          but up to now,cancel memory test item still PASS for 4 days
          (I still suspect that memory test is root cause)


          • #20
            testing strict with RAM at RAM item BurnInTest Preferences

            Standard > Multi-Process test

            Standard < Multi-Process test

            Standard = Multi-Process test

            just different test method

            Because setting at Multi-Process test,the RAM use smoothly at the same sample



            • #21
              To answer your questions,
              1) The Standard test is similar to a Multi-Process torture test with 4 processes, but rather than allocating a % of total RAM (and hence potentially testing the paging mechanism), it tests a % of available RAM.
              2) While the intent is for all memtest.exe processes to have the same amount of RAM, if one process can't allcoate the requested amount (for example due to the allocation to some other process between the process of calulating the amount of test RAM and actually allocating it), then a memtest.exe can have a lower memory allcoation to the requested amount, and hence the memtest.exe processes may not alll allocate the same amount of RAM.

              Based on your new testing showing that the Hotfixes and 64-bit Vista are not a factor in the testing, then as you say we can rule those out. It could still be a system component memory leak.

              We are still working on our own testing. We have added additional logging to help determine what is occuring, we will send it to you when ready.



              • #22
                We have added some additional trace level2 logging for the memory test in a new debug build of 32-bit BurnInTest Pro V6.0.1004 available here:

                If you could email me the level 2 .trace files I will have a look.

                FYI, we have not been able to reproduce the problem yet.



                • #23
                  1. Running burn-in test 6.0,how much do The RAM requests least.

                  is 1G or 2G??

                  2.There are 2 RAM slot on NoteBook,can I use only 1 slot
                  with 1G RAM running Multi-Process torture .

                  will system hang up?


                  • #24
                    1. With V6.0 you can test 1GB or 2GB systems
                    2. Sure, you can test the Multi-Process torture test with 1GB of RAM. As I mentioned, the Multi-Process Torture test (unlike the Standard test) uses a % of total RAM. Hence if you request significantly more RAM than is availble (e.g. 7 processes of 10%, i.e. 70%, but only 50% is available), then the paging mechsnism will be tested, with processes beign swapped from RAM to the disk page file. It is this process of continuosly paging (thrashing) that can make your system hang (become very unresponsive). If you don't want to test the paging mechanism, then reduce the requested test RAM size,(e.g. 5 processes of 10% - this depends on your system).



                    • #25
                      Does BurnInTest Pro V6.0.1004 use the same setting?

                      Does BurnInTest Pro V6.0.1004 use the same setting?

                      trace 2 level activity log with periodic logging set to 1 minute, *.trace, ( Preferences->Logging),


                      • #26
                        Yes thanks.


                        • #27
                          BurnInTest 6.0_1004 Test result

                          BurnInTest 6.0_1004 Test result:

                          Up to now,Error of RAM has not appear yet.

                          but have 2 sets to appear network error and hang up,
                          Log and trace was mailed already to your mail :

                          I wiill continue to test ,still appear Error of RAM


                          • #28
                            At duration 16 m 24 s,appear error opening browser say "There was not enough memory complete the operation".




                            sound Log and trace was mailed already to your mail :


                            • #29
                              1. 3D Graphics and Network show errpr message.
                              2. 4 items memtest.exe disappear from processes of windows tesk manager.


                              Log and trace was mailed already to your mail :


                              • #30
                                We beleive that these issues are resolved in the latest build of BurnInTest, V6.0.1006, available here:

                                Last edited by Ian (PassMark); 03-26-2009, 01:20 AM.