* Re: ICH7: ata_piix twice as fast as ahci?
@ 2008-04-25 3:09 kyle
0 siblings, 0 replies; 5+ messages in thread
From: kyle @ 2008-04-25 3:09 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-ide; +Cc: joris
Hello Joris,
Have you solve the problem? If so, how? I think I hit the similiar problem
as yours,
but instead of ICH7, I hit the problem with ICH9.
8 x Seagate 500GB harddisks are connected to ICH9 and sil24 PCI-E
controller,
transfer rate of disks connected to ICH9 are limited at around 47MB/s, while
disks connected to sil24 reach 104MB/s. All harddisks are NCQ enabled, so I
don't think NCQ is the problem.
please cc me if possible.
Regards,
Kyle
> Hello List,
> Odd problem on my machines: the sata disks appear to be a lot slower
> when used via ata_piix vs the ahci driver.
> * dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/null runs at roughly 50MB/s under ahci a
> steady 100MB/s under ata_piix, same for hdparm
> * bonnie++ -d /home/bonnietest -s 16G -r 8192 -u root returns:
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* ICH7: ata_piix twice as fast as ahci?
@ 2008-02-17 15:41 Joris
2008-02-17 16:10 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Joris @ 2008-02-17 15:41 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Linux IDE
Hello List,
Odd problem on my machines: the sata disks appear to be a lot slower
when used via ata_piix vs the ahci driver.
* dd if=/dev/sda of=/dev/null runs at roughly 50MB/s under ahci a
steady 100MB/s under ata_piix, same for hdparm
* bonnie++ -d /home/bonnietest -s 16G -r 8192 -u root returns:
** ahci 64bit,16G,70460,99,92676,15,45442,6,66155,94,103556,7,515.9,0,16,4300,16,+++++,+++,2698,9,4735,18,+++++,+++,2611,9
** ata_piix 32bit,16G,50939,99,88159,16,41311,11,38945,69,108351,16,352.9,0,16,5045,5,+++++,+++,3882,4,5099,5,+++++,+++,3489,3
Is this a known issue? Is there a way to diagnose and/or fix this?
I'd love to combine a high-speed system with hotpluggable disks.
Kind regards,
Joris
Extra info:
I tried the following without result:
* The 'raid' functionality was disabled in the bios.
* Update kernels (the debian stable 2.6.18-6-amd64 and 2.6.22-3-amd64
from backports.org)
* Reinstall OS in 32 bit mode
* Limit the amount of ram on the machine to 2GB using the mem=2048M
kernel parameter.
HW info:
Xeon 3210, Supermicro PDSMi+ motherboard, Seagate ES2 500GB sata disks, 8GB ram
Sata controller: 00:1f.2 SATA controller: Intel Corporation 82801GR/GH
(ICH7 Family) Serial ATA Storage Controller AHCI (rev 01)
OS: A bare Debian 4.0 with all security updates, running nothing but
some idle daemons and ssh.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: ICH7: ata_piix twice as fast as ahci?
2008-02-17 15:41 Joris
@ 2008-02-17 16:10 ` Alan Cox
2008-02-17 16:39 ` Joris
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Alan Cox @ 2008-02-17 16:10 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Joris; +Cc: Linux IDE
On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:41:42 +0100
Joris <joris@v5.be> wrote:
> Hello List,
>
> Odd problem on my machines: the sata disks appear to be a lot slower
> when used via ata_piix vs the ahci driver.
I would expect that. AHCI allows the use of NCQ and unloads a ton of work
from the processor. It also means you pretty much avoid the inter command
latency that limits standard IDE performance.
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
* Re: ICH7: ata_piix twice as fast as ahci?
2008-02-17 16:10 ` Alan Cox
@ 2008-02-17 16:39 ` Joris
2008-02-17 17:20 ` Alan Cox
0 siblings, 1 reply; 5+ messages in thread
From: Joris @ 2008-02-17 16:39 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Alan Cox; +Cc: Linux IDE
2008/2/17, Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>:
> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:41:42 +0100
> Joris <joris@v5.be> wrote:
>
> > Hello List,
> >
> > Odd problem on my machines: the sata disks appear to be a lot slower
> > when used via ata_piix vs the ahci driver.
>
> I would expect that. AHCI allows the use of NCQ and unloads a ton of work
> from the processor. It also means you pretty much avoid the inter command
> latency that limits standard IDE performance.
Alan,
>From your response I'm not sure if I made clear that ata_piix was
faster, and ahci slower?
Am I interpreting this correctly as having to choose between fast iops
with low cpu (+ hotplug) with ahci and twice the linear read speed
with ata_piix?
Kind regards,
Joris
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 5+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2008-04-25 3:09 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 5+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2008-04-25 3:09 ICH7: ata_piix twice as fast as ahci? kyle
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2008-02-17 15:41 Joris
2008-02-17 16:10 ` Alan Cox
2008-02-17 16:39 ` Joris
2008-02-17 17:20 ` Alan Cox
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox;
as well as URLs for NNTP newsgroup(s).