From: Tomasz Chmielewski <mangoo@wpkg.org>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, linux-raid@vger.kernel.org,
rshitrit@marvell.com, dan.j.williams@intel.com,
nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au, Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>,
ilmari@ilmari.org
Subject: RE: [PATCH 00/16] raid acceleration and asynchronous offload api for 2.6.22
Date: Thu, 10 May 2007 16:12:11 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <4643283B.2060203@wpkg.org> (raw)
Ronen Shitrit wrote:
> The resync numbers you sent, looks very promising :)
> Do you have any performance numbers that you can share for these set of
> patches, which shows the Rd/Wr IO bandwidth.
I have some simple tests made with hdparm, with the results I don't
understand.
We see hdparm results are fine if we access the whole device:
thecus:~# hdparm -Tt /dev/sdd
/dev/sdd:
Timing cached reads: 392 MB in 2.00 seconds = 195.71 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 146 MB in 3.01 seconds = 48.47 MB/sec
But are 10 times worse (Timing buffered disk reads) when we access
partitions:
thecus:/# hdparm -Tt /dev/sdc1 /dev/sdd1
/dev/sdc1:
Timing cached reads: 396 MB in 2.01 seconds = 197.18 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 16 MB in 3.32 seconds = 4.83 MB/sec
/dev/sdd1:
Timing cached reads: 394 MB in 2.00 seconds = 196.89 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 16 MB in 3.13 seconds = 5.11 MB/sec
Why is it so much worse?
I used 2.6.21-iop1 patches from http://sf.net/projects/xscaleiop; right
now I use 2.6.17-iop1, for which the results are ~35 MB/s when accessing
a device (/dev/sdd) or a partition (/dev/sdd1).
In kernel config, I enabled Intel DMA engines.
The device I use is Thecus n4100, it is "Platform: IQ31244 (XScale)",
and has 600 MHz CPU.
--
Tomasz Chmielewski
http://wpkg.org
next reply other threads:[~2007-05-10 14:12 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 11+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2007-05-10 14:12 Tomasz Chmielewski [this message]
2007-05-10 15:32 ` [PATCH 00/16] raid acceleration and asynchronous offload api for 2.6.22 Tomasz Chmielewski
-- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2007-05-09 12:46 Ronen Shitrit
2007-05-02 6:14 Dan Williams
2007-05-02 6:55 ` Nick Piggin
2007-05-02 15:45 ` Williams, Dan J
2007-05-02 15:55 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-05-02 16:17 ` Williams, Dan J
2007-05-02 16:19 ` Justin Piszcz
2007-05-02 16:36 ` Dagfinn Ilmari Mannsåker
2007-05-02 16:42 ` Williams, Dan J
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=4643283B.2060203@wpkg.org \
--to=mangoo@wpkg.org \
--cc=dan.j.williams@intel.com \
--cc=ilmari@ilmari.org \
--cc=jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=linux-raid@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
--cc=rshitrit@marvell.com \
/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 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).