From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Tomasz Chmielewski Subject: Re: strange hdparm results with serverworks and pata-serverworks Date: Wed, 25 Feb 2009 10:44:13 +0100 Message-ID: <49A512ED.9080706@wpkg.org> References: <49A30901.1@wpkg.org> <49A3F63A.2080805@rtr.ca> <49A43E73.6070705@wpkg.org> <49A4771F.5060802@rtr.ca> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from mx03.syneticon.net ([78.111.66.105]:44595 "EHLO mx03.syneticon.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751163AbZBYJnu (ORCPT ); Wed, 25 Feb 2009 04:43:50 -0500 In-Reply-To: <49A4771F.5060802@rtr.ca> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Mark Lord Cc: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org Mark Lord schrieb: > Everything looks configured correctly, so the only explanations > for the slow (10/20MB/sec) speeds are the CPU/RAM, or other system > activity. It's a pretty powerful machine with plenty of RAM, no other activity. > As for the disparity in initial throughput between the master/slave drives, > you could try reversing the two drives (swap them on the cable if using > "cable select", otherwise rejumper the master/slave setup). Then see if > the > slow start follows the specific drive to its new position on the cable, > or if the master ("a") drive is always slower. Yes, "reversing" the drives makes the master slower (at least initially). Controller's "feature"? -- Tomasz Chmielewski http://wpkg.org