On Fri, 10 Feb 2023 11:42:31 +0100 Fabio Fantoni <fantonifa...@tiscali.it> wrote: > I saw on upstream git history that there was some improvements related > to badram output included in 6.10: > https://github.com/memtest86plus/memtest86plus/pull/178
Judging by its title that pull request does not target correctness. The bookworm version of memtest86+ definitely reports wrong BadRAM patterns. Upstream 7.00 reports them correctly. I haven't checked the bookworm- backports version. > if someone will test it please tell me if sectors reported to set in > badram works correctly in 6.10 and this bug can be closed Not for 6.10. -- Regards, Feri.
