MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2 Release (2021-02-10 Update - Beta testing is now closed)

[kscudero]

I was attempting to test the latest version of MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2 Release (2021-01-20) via USB Boot.

It appears to boot/initialize properly. Unfortunately, it hangs as soon as a test starts. No response from the keyboard, either (e.g. ESC nor c).

---

I've already tested/used MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 1 Release (2020-12-03) via USB Boot (using the same USB Flash drive) with no issues.

---

The USB Flash drive was formatted (as NTFS, via the USB Image tool [imageUSB.exe]) before each respective version of software was written to the USB Flash drive.

---

MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2 Release (2021-01-20): Log file (small: 41KB) is attached.
MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 1 Release (2020-12-03): Could not attach Log (too large: 160 KB) nor Report (HTML not permitted).

[user789]

user789, can you Email us a log file.

Hi David,

Thank you

[David (PassMark)]

You can Zip the files to make them smaller.
You don't need to pre-format the USB drive first of you are using ImageUSB, as all the formatting / partitioning data is overwritten in any case.


It is a strange place to the tests to stop. I would be thinking it was a hardware or motherboard firmware issue. Or just a random failure?

The big change between Beta 1 and Beta 2 was ARM CPU support and this isn't an ARM CPU, so the differences should be really minor between Beta 1 and 2 for this machine.

[kscudero]

I (re-)tested MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 1 (re-)using the same hardware and process immediately prior to retesting MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2, so I would have thought the only difference was between v9.0 Beta 1 and Beta 2, not the hardware nor the process.

---

Apparently, I am not allowed to upload zip files, either.

---

So I attached a snippet from the MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 1 log.

[kscudero]

I split the MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 1 log into three (3) parts.
Please find them attached.

---

My upload limit was three (3) items, so I have to attach the MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 1 HTML Report (converted into a jpg) in another post.

[kscudero]

I converted the MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 1 HTML Report into a jpg.
Please find it attached.

---

[kscudero]

Just to be thorough, I retested MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2 using:
CPU Mode 0 (CPU 0 only), CPU Mode 0 (CPU 2 only), CPU Mode 2 (Round-Robin), & CPU Mode 3 (Sequential).
Same lockup on first test.

[keith]

I was attempting to test the latest version of MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2 Release (2021-01-20) via USB Boot.

It appears to boot/initialize properly. Unfortunately, it hangs as soon as a test starts. No response from the keyboard, either (e.g. ESC nor c).

---

I've already tested/used MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 1 Release (2020-12-03) via USB Boot (using the same USB Flash drive) with no issues.

---

The USB Flash drive was formatted (as NTFS, via the USB Image tool [imageUSB.exe]) before each respective version of software was written to the USB Flash drive.

---

MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2 Release (2021-01-20): Log file (small: 41KB) is attached.
MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 1 Release (2020-12-03): Could not attach Log (too large: 160 KB) nor Report (HTML not permitted).

We sent a reply by e-mail. The issue seems to be related to polling of DIMM temperature introduced in Beta 2.

The following build should fix this issue:
https://www.passmark.com/temp/memtes...9.0b2.0007.zip

[kscudero]

Thank you for responding so quickly! I do so hope some of my feedback has been helpful ...

---

So hot off the presses, it's not even autographed (signed)! Unfortunately, I got stuck at the (dreaded) Secure Boot failed!

---

BTW, some Copyright dates may need to be updated ...

---

readme.txt:
PassMark ® Software MemTest86™
Copyright (C) 2013-2020 PassMark Software
All Rights Reserved

---

ReadMe_imageUSB.txt:
PassMark ImageUSB V1.5
Copyright (C) 2010-2019 PassMark Software
All Rights Reserved

---

MemTest86_User_Guide_UEFI.pdf appears to be OK.

---

The biggest reward for a thing well done is to have done it.
- Voltaire

[David (PassMark)]

That test build (9.0b2.0007) was not code signed by Microsoft (the process can take a week to get it done). So secure boot rejects it. So you would need to turn off secure boot in BIOS to get it to work. We'll get it signed for the final release. Which should be in around one week.

[kscudero]

Well, I tried! I really did!
I just could not get past the Secure Boot failure. Turn off Secure Boot, machine only boots in Legacy.
I tried signing BOOTX64.efi (made my own keys), I tried to use Easy2Boot, AIO Boot, even Oracle VirtualBox.
(Well, OK, it ran all 4 passes in VBx, but it wasn't "real" memory. Didn't beep at the end, either; probably needed a VBx setting change.)

---

And let us not forget all the Copyright notices that should be updated.

[kscudero]

Well, it took me a few days (02-03-2021 to 02-07-2021) ... but I finally got PassMark MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2-0007 to run.

---

Using a combination of:
Linux PreLoader (PreLoader.efi & HashTool.efi), Easy2Boot agFm File Manager (grubfmx64.efi),
and signing the PassMark MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2-0007 Boot file (BOOTX64.efi),
I managed to add a MOK/hash to my machine and subsequently run it.

---

Log files attached (a set of three (3)), followed by the MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2-0007 HTML Report (converted into a jpg).
All tests ran without issue.
(I thought there was supposed to be an audible alert at test completion (I was present for the test completion),
but there wasn't ... just the PASS dialog box ...

[kscudero]

I converted the MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2-0007 HTML Report into a jpg.
Please find it attached.

---

[kscudero]

I was archiving (and attempting to document) the configuration I created
to make PassMark MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2-0007 work for me,
and discovered a small error on my part ...

---

(Ex-co-worker jpe (jokingly): I can't believe it! You made a mistake?!?!?

---

In my haste, while trying to rename files to test my latest idea, I accidentally renamed
PassMark MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2-0007 BOOTX64.efi as USBOOTX64efi (US for UnSigned) ...
Apparently, Easy2Boot agFM File Manager does not recognize a .efi file as a .efi file
unless it specifically has a .efi extension name. I corrected the file extension name, and re-tested ...

---

Easy2Boot agFM File Manager was able to recognize and run
the unsigned PassMark MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2-0007 Boot .efi file
without needing to add its MOK/Hash.
So (apparently) there was no need to sign the PassMark MemTest86 v9.0 Beta 2-0007 Boot file after all.
Might be handy to know if/when another Boot file needs to be tested when using Secure Boot ...

---

Attached is a list of files I used (in directory EFI/BOOT):

.

[David (PassMark)]

We've submitted, what we hope, is the final V9 build to Microsoft for secure boot coding signing today. It will take a few days. But once that is done, you won't have to deal with any stuff above. It should just work.