On Fri, Sep 18, 2015 at 06:54:58AM +0000, jim bell wrote:
From: Georgi Guninski <guninski@guninski.com>
On Wed, Sep 16, 2015 at 11:46:26PM -0400, grarpamp wrote:
http://users.ece.cmu.edu/~omutlu/pub/dram-row-hammer_kim_talk_isca14.pdf p. 32 of the PDF: .– Simple ECC (e.g., SECDED) cannot prevent all errors From wikipedia: Tests show that simple ECC solutions, providing single-error correction and double-error detection (SECDED) capabilities, are not able to correct or detect all observed disturbance errors because some of them include more than two flipped bits per memory word.[1]:8[11]:32 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Row_hammer#cite_ref-isca14-talk_11-0
But all single-bit and triple-bit errors are detectable by parity, and so are all double-bit errors using ECC. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dynamic_random-access_memory#Errors%5Fand%5Fer...
Jim Bell
AFAICT Rowhammer (non-weaponized) publicly appeared in: http://users.ece.cmu.edu/~yoonguk/papers/kim-isca14.pdf Flipping Bits in Memory Without Accessing Them: An Experimental Study of DRAM Disturbance Errors (from 2014) On p. 8: Therefore, we conclude that SECDED is not failsafe against disturbance errors. Table 5. Uncorrectable multi-bit errors (in bold) Consider publishing your claim as counterexample to the paper (possibly on arxiv.org).