From: Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@interia.pl>
To: Andre Bender <andre.bender@gmx.de>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: poor SATA performance under 2.6.11 (with < 2.6.11 is OK)?
Date: Fri, 15 Apr 2005 13:07:21 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <425FA069.9040602@interia.pl> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <425F6E27.6040903@gmx.de>
Andre Bender wrote:
>>OK so Tomasz Torch suggested that my drive was blacklisted somewhere
>>after 2.6.8.1 (it's the last kernel on which I have good performance).
>>
>>Does drive blacklisting = very poor performance?
>>And no drive blacklisting = good performance, and possibly data corruption?
>
>
> That's what has already been told some posts ago. The kernel developers
> don't blacklist anything that works just for fun. There seems to be a
> serious problem when combining this pieces of hardware so the
> combination is blacklisted to get it working properly but with (much)
> less performance.
I see, there were people reporting "drive hangups".
They were reporting it happens quite quickly.
I don't experience those under 2.6.8.1, in which my drive wasn't
blacklisted yet (it seems it got blacklisted in 2.6.11, see this link
http://www.linuxhq.com/kernel/v2.6/11-rc2-bk6/drivers/scsi/sata_sil.c ).
My setup is SiI 3112 SATA PCI controller, 2x Seagate Barracuda 200 GB, 8
MB cache, 7200 rpm (Model: ST3200822AS ) connected into one Linux md0
raid1, ext3 filesystem on md0.
I am running several tests:
1) creating 1 GB file from /dev/zero using dd, then calculating it's
md5sum (it should always be the same; it stresses drive, too), then
copying it with a new name, calculating md5sum again - if it doesn't
match, the script will quit
I run two of these tests in parallel.
2) tar'ring / to a file (so it opens many files), then calculating its
md5sum (md5sums will differ, but it stresses the drive)
3) copying /dev/hda1 partition (which is 800 megs big on an IDE disk) to
Seagate SATA drives, then calculating it's md5sum (which should be
always the same, as /dev/hda1 is not used)
4) rsyncing / to /root/test4, then removing it - so it opens many files
and creates many, too.
These 4 tests are running simultaneously, each in a loop.
I believe it is quite stressing for the drives.
So far no hangup, weird system log, etc. unexpected behaviour.
It's 4 hours they are running now, I know it's not much, but people
reported almost instant hangups.
Or perhaps my "tests" are wrong?
# cat /proc/scsi/scsi
Attached devices:
Host: scsi1 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00
Vendor: ATA Model: ST3200822AS Rev: 3.01
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05
Host: scsi2 Channel: 00 Id: 00 Lun: 00
Vendor: ATA Model: ST3200822AS Rev: 3.01
Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 05
# lspci -vv (for SiI 3112 SATA PCI controller):
02:09.0 Unknown mass storage controller: Silicon Image, Inc. (formerly
CMD Technology Inc) SiI 3112 [SATALink/SATARaid] Serial ATA Controller
(rev 02)
Subsystem: Silicon Image, Inc. (formerly CMD Technology Inc)
SiI 3112 SATALink Controller
Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop-
ParErr- Stepping- SERR+ FastB2B-
Status: Cap+ 66Mhz+ UDF- FastB2B+ ParErr- DEVSEL=medium
>TAbort- <TAbort- <MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
Latency: 64, cache line size 08
Interrupt: pin A routed to IRQ 11
Region 0: I/O ports at 4800 [size=8]
Region 1: I/O ports at 4400 [size=4]
Region 2: I/O ports at 4000 [size=8]
Region 3: I/O ports at 3c00 [size=4]
Region 4: I/O ports at 3800 [size=16]
Region 5: Memory at d0101400 (32-bit, non-prefetchable) [size=512]
Expansion ROM at <unassigned> [disabled] [size=512K]
Capabilities: [60] Power Management version 2
Flags: PMEClk- DSI+ D1+ D2+ AuxCurrent=0mA
PME(D0-,D1-,D2-,D3hot-,D3cold-)
Status: D0 PME-Enable- DSel=0 DScale=2 PME-
Tomek
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Startuj z INTERIA.PL! >>> http://link.interia.pl/f186c
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-04-15 11:07 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-04-14 16:23 poor SATA performance under 2.6.11 (with < 2.6.11 is OK)? Tomasz Chmielewski
2005-04-14 16:55 ` Tomasz Torcz
2005-04-14 22:08 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
2005-04-14 22:34 ` Chris Wright
2005-04-15 7:24 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
2005-04-15 7:32 ` Andre Bender
2005-04-15 11:07 ` Tomasz Chmielewski [this message]
2005-04-14 23:03 ` Tomasz Torcz
2005-04-15 7:21 ` Tomasz Chmielewski
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2005-04-14 16:23 Tomasz Chmielewski
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=425FA069.9040602@interia.pl \
--to=mangoo@interia.pl \
--cc=andre.bender@gmx.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.