[thebruce87m]

I think you responded to the wrong person, unless you think I was implying that the extra bits needed for ECC didn’t need extra space at all? I wasn’t suggesting that - just that they aren’t like a checksum that is stored elsewhere or something that can be ignored - the whole 72 bits are needed to decode the 64 bits of data and the 64 bits of data cannot be read independently.

[smalley]

If we're talking about standard server RDIMMs with ECC (or the prosumer stuff) the CPU visible ECC (excluding DDR5's on-die ECC) is typically implemented as a sideband value you could ignore if you disabled the correction logic.

I suppose what winds up where is up to the memory controller but (for DDR5) in each BL16 transaction beat you're usually getting 32 bits of data value and 8 bits of ECC (per sub channel). Those ECC bits are usually called check bits CB[7:0] and they accompany the data bits DQ[31:0] .

If you're talking about transactions for LPDDR things are a bit different there, though as that has to be transmitted inband with your data

[thebruce87m]

We are talking about errors happening in user space applications with ECC operating normally and what the application ultimately sees.

My point is that when writing an app you wouldn’t be able to “not use” ECC accidentally or easily if it’s there. It’s just seamless. I’m not talking about special test modes or accessing stuff differently on purpose.

Interesting that DDR5 is different than DDR4. 8 bits for 32 is doubling of 8 for 64 so it must have been warranted.