From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Subject: Re: kernel history of ide performance Date: Tue, 5 Apr 2005 11:14:39 +0200 Message-ID: <58cb370e050405021470f3a851@mail.gmail.com> References: <1112690797.4252506dd574e@kiun.homelinux.net> <4252541B.3030209@gmx.de> Reply-To: Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from wproxy.gmail.com ([64.233.184.200]:46490 "EHLO wproxy.gmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261648AbVDEJOj (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Apr 2005 05:14:39 -0400 Received: by wproxy.gmail.com with SMTP id 68so366959wra for ; Tue, 05 Apr 2005 02:14:39 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4252541B.3030209@gmx.de> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: "Oliver.Korpilla@gmx.de" Cc: kiu , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On Apr 5, 2005 11:02 AM, Oliver.Korpilla@gmx.de wrote: > kiu wrote: > > Hi ide team, > > > > i often heard "uh, since kernel 2.6.bla the ide perfomance is soo bad". > > Because of that (and the joy of writing bash scripts noone else will understand > > *g*) i wrote an automated test script to get comparable measurements. > > > > The script compiles 2.6.0-2.6.11.6 (yes "" | make oldconfig), boots each kernel, > > runs hdparm/bonnie++ and create some pngs with gnuplot. > > > > I ran the script on a Intel 82371AB/EB/MB PIIX4/PIICeleron 333/IC35L040AVER07 > > machine and you can find the results here: > > > > http://www.kiu.weite-welt.com/misc/idetest > > > > I am quite busy at the moment and hopefully have time next month to clean up the > > scripts for a release (are you interested?) and do further testing... > > This looks like a mixed bag: some regression, some clear improvements, > mostly the same. Nice work! > > Does this portray the IDE situation or more the situation of the PIIX > chipset - I guess the code isn't changed as much since it should be > rather mature? Probably the situation of VM code... Having scripts at hand would be useful to double check that testing procedure itself is OK. Bartlomiej