From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tejun Heo Subject: Re: How to determine performance bottleneck? Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2008 16:00:08 +0900 Message-ID: <48F44378.6070109@kernel.org> References: <20081013202836.3fc62c3e@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> <48F3D8E2.8000006@kernel.org> <20081014070728.386a9cf2@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> <48F43025.8050705@kernel.org> <20081014080304.65445c51@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> <48F43844.9080603@kernel.org> <20081014085933.67b602ae@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from hera.kernel.org ([140.211.167.34]:43373 "EHLO hera.kernel.org" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1752316AbYJNHC6 (ORCPT ); Tue, 14 Oct 2008 03:02:58 -0400 In-Reply-To: <20081014085933.67b602ae@mjolnir.drzeus.cx> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Pierre Ossman Cc: Jeff Garzik , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Pierre Ossman wrote: > On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 15:12:20 +0900 > Tejun Heo wrote: > >> Pierre Ossman wrote: >>> Do you remember if that's a new chip designation, or 3132 (rev 02)? >>> Just so I know what to keep an eye out for. >> Yeah, it had a new designation. Something like 3132-2 (don't confuse it >> with 3132 2 ports or 3132 2 ports SATA 2, yeah a lot of 2s there). >> > > Ok. Thanks for all the info. :) > > Any objections to putting this on the wiki, so the next person having > less than expected performance doesn't have to ask on the mailing list? Hmmm... Let me check this with SIMG first so that I have more concrete idea about which ones have what kind of limit and whether there are any which don't have such limitations. Thanks. -- tejun