* Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module [not found] <Pine.LNX.4.61.0503081327560.28812@praktifix.dwd.de> @ 2005-03-21 23:27 ` Andrew Morton 2005-03-22 7:32 ` Janne Pikkarainen 2005-03-22 8:31 ` Holger Kiehl 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2005-03-21 23:27 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Holger Kiehl; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-scsi, Moore, Eric Dean Holger Kiehl <Holger.Kiehl@dwd.de> wrote: > > Hello > > On a four CPU Opteron compiling the Fusion-MPT as module gives much better > performance when compiling it in, here some bonnie++ results: > > Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random- > -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks-- > Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP > compiled in 15872M 38366 71 65602 22 18348 4 53276 84 57947 7 905.4 2 > module 15872M 51246 96 204914 70 57236 14 59779 96 264171 33 923.0 2 > > This happens with 2.6.10, 2.6.11 and 2.6.11-bk2. Controller is a > Symbios Logic 53c1030 PCI-X Fusion-MPT Dual Ultra320 SCSI. > > Why is there such a large difference? > Holger, this problem remains unresolved, does it not? Have you done any more experimentation? I must say that something funny seems to be happening here. I have two MPT-based Dell machines, neither of which is using a modular driver: akpm:/usr/src/25> 0 hdparm -t /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.00 seconds = 12.80 MB/sec That's a bit disappointing. Running 2.6.9-rc2-mm2(!) with a SCSI storage controller: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic 53c1030 (rev 07) controller on disks which shudl hit 50MB/sec. And bix:/home/akpm# hdparm -t /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing buffered disk reads: 114 MB in 3.03 seconds = 37.57 MB/sec with 2.6.11-rc4-mm1 using Fusion MPT SCSI Host driver 3.01.16 scsi0 : ioc0: LSI53C1030, FwRev=01030600h, Ports=1, MaxQ=222, IRQ=25 scsi1 : ioc1: LSI53C1030, FwRev=01030600h, Ports=1, MaxQ=222, IRQ=26 Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST3146807LW Rev: DS09 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 03 Better, but again I'd expect >50MB/sec. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module 2005-03-21 23:27 ` Fusion-MPT much faster as module Andrew Morton @ 2005-03-22 7:32 ` Janne Pikkarainen 2005-03-22 8:31 ` Holger Kiehl 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Janne Pikkarainen @ 2005-03-22 7:32 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: Holger Kiehl, linux-kernel, linux-scsi, Moore, Eric Dean Hello everyone, On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 15:27 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On a four CPU Opteron compiling the Fusion-MPT as module gives much better > > performance when compiling it in, here some bonnie++ results: > > > > Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random- > > -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks-- > > Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP > > compiled in 15872M 38366 71 65602 22 18348 4 53276 84 57947 7 905.4 2 > > module 15872M 51246 96 204914 70 57236 14 59779 96 264171 33 923.0 2 > > > > This happens with 2.6.10, 2.6.11 and 2.6.11-bk2. Controller is a > > Symbios Logic 53c1030 PCI-X Fusion-MPT Dual Ultra320 SCSI. > > > > Why is there such a large difference? > > > > Holger, this problem remains unresolved, does it not? Have you done any > more experimentation? Quick summary: - older IBM xSeries 335 + kernel 2.4.26 = surprisingly slow - older IBM xSeries 335 + kernel 2.6.8 = pretty fast - newer IBM xSeries 335 + kernel 2.6.9 = pretty fast - newer IBM xSeries 335 (and a 336) + kernel 2.6.10 = surprisingly slow Longer story: I'm administering bunch of IBM xSeries 335 servers (and one 336, too), all equipped with the exactly same SCSI controller than in the case above. In every server Fusion MPT module is compiled straight into kernel and disk setup is two identical SCSI hard drives in RAID-1 mode. For the 2.6.x servers about the same kernel .config file is used. One of the older servers (still using kernel 2.6.8) with P4 Xeon 2.0 GHz and ~70 GB U320 SCSI disk gives me pretty good results: --- hdparm -t /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing buffered disk reads: 136 MB in 3.02 seconds = 45.01 MB/sec --- Identical hardware, but with kernel 2.4.25: --- hdparm -t /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 3.35 seconds = 19.10 MB/sec --- A newer generation of x335 (using kernel 2.6.9) with dual P4 Xeon 3.0 GHz and ~70 GB U320 SCSI disk: --- hdparm -t /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing buffered disk reads: 130 MB in 3.07 seconds = 42.35 MB/sec --- Still a bit newer generation of x335 with P4 Xeon 3.06 GHz and ~140 GB U320 SCSI disk, using kernel 2.6.10 is a big disappoitment: --- hdparm -t /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing buffered disk reads: 48 MB in 3.11 seconds = 15.43 MB/sec --- And the latest x336 with dual P4 Xeon 3.2 GHz (using kernel 2.6.10) with ~140 GB U320 SCSI disk is also very disappointing: --- hdparm -t /dev/sda /dev/sda: Timing buffered disk reads: 58 MB in 3.02 seconds = 19.20 MB/sec --- Some info about the oldest x335: --- mptbase: Initiating ioc0 bringup ioc0: 53C1030: Capabilities={Initiator} Fusion MPT SCSI Host driver 3.01.09 scsi0 : ioc0: LSI53C1030, FwRev=01000e00h, Ports=1, MaxQ=222, IRQ=177 Vendor: LSILOGIC Model: 1030 IM Rev: 1000 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 SCSI device sda: 143372288 512-byte hdwr sectors (73407 MB) SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target0/lun0: p1 p2 p3 p4 < p5 p6 p7 p8 > Attached scsi disk sda at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 Attached scsi generic sg0 at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0, type 0 Vendor: IBM Model: 25P3495a S320 1 Rev: 1 Type: Processor ANSI SCSI revision: 02 --- A bit newer x335 with kernel 2.6.9: --- mptbase: Initiating ioc0 bringup ioc0: 53C1030: Capabilities={Initiator} Fusion MPT SCSI Host driver 3.01.16 scsi0 : ioc0: LSI53C1030, FwRev=01000e00h, Ports=1, MaxQ=222, IRQ=22 Vendor: LSILOGIC Model: 1030 IM Rev: 1000 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 SCSI device sda: 143372288 512-byte hdwr sectors (73407 MB) SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target0/lun0: p1 p2 p3 p4 < p5 p6 p7 p8 > Attached scsi disk sda at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 Attached scsi generic sg0 at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0, type 0 Vendor: IBM Model: 25P3495a S320 1 Rev: 1 Type: Processor ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Attached scsi generic sg1 at scsi0, channel 0, id 8, lun 0, type 3 --- And the latest x335 we have: --- Fusion MPT base driver 3.01.18 Copyright (c) 1999-2004 LSI Logic Corporation ACPI: PCI interrupt 0000:01:01.0[A] -> GSI 22 (level, low) -> IRQ 169 mptbase: Initiating ioc0 bringup ioc0: 53C1030: Capabilities={Initiator} Fusion MPT SCSI Host driver 3.01.18 scsi0 : ioc0: LSI53C1030, FwRev=01032316h, Ports=1, MaxQ=222, IRQ=169 Vendor: LSILOGIC Model: 1030 IM Rev: 1000 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 SCSI device sda: 286746624 512-byte hdwr sectors (146814 MB) SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back SCSI device sda: 286746624 512-byte hdwr sectors (146814 MB) SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target0/lun0: p1 p2 p3 p4 < p5 p6 p7 p8 > Attached scsi disk sda at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 Attached scsi generic sg0 at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0, type 0 Vendor: IBM Model: 25P3495a S320 1 Rev: 1 Type: Processor ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Attached scsi generic sg1 at scsi0, channel 0, id 8, lun 0, type 3 --- x336: --- mptbase: Initiating ioc0 bringup ioc0: 53C1030: Capabilities={Initiator} Fusion MPT SCSI Host driver 3.01.18 scsi0 : ioc0: LSI53C1030, FwRev=01032316h, Ports=1, MaxQ=222, IRQ=169 Vendor: LSILOGIC Model: 1030 IM Rev: 1000 Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 02 SCSI device sda: 286746624 512-byte hdwr sectors (146814 MB) SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back SCSI device sda: 286746624 512-byte hdwr sectors (146814 MB) SCSI device sda: drive cache: write back /dev/scsi/host0/bus0/target0/lun0: p1 p2 p3 p4 < p5 p6 p7 p8 > Attached scsi disk sda at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0 Attached scsi generic sg0 at scsi0, channel 0, id 0, lun 0, type 0 Vendor: IBM Model: 25P3495a S320 1 Rev: 1 Type: Processor ANSI SCSI revision: 02 Attached scsi generic sg1 at scsi0, channel 0, id 8, lun 0, type 3 --- I'll gladly be your test puppet and provide you any further information you may need and can also upgrade the 2.6.8 server to be a 2.6.11 one and/or test the Fusion MPT as a kernel module. I cannot boot the servers at will, though, except the 2.6.8 one which is more or less only a testbed server. Best regards, Janne Pikkarainen ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module 2005-03-21 23:27 ` Fusion-MPT much faster as module Andrew Morton 2005-03-22 7:32 ` Janne Pikkarainen @ 2005-03-22 8:31 ` Holger Kiehl 2005-03-22 10:29 ` Chen, Kenneth W 1 sibling, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Holger Kiehl @ 2005-03-22 8:31 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Andrew Morton; +Cc: linux-kernel, linux-scsi, Moore, Eric Dean On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: > Holger Kiehl <Holger.Kiehl@dwd.de> wrote: >> >> Hello >> >> On a four CPU Opteron compiling the Fusion-MPT as module gives much better >> performance when compiling it in, here some bonnie++ results: >> >> Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ --Sequential Input- --Random- >> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per Chr- --Block-- --Seeks-- >> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP /sec %CP >> compiled in 15872M 38366 71 65602 22 18348 4 53276 84 57947 7 905.4 2 >> module 15872M 51246 96 204914 70 57236 14 59779 96 264171 33 923.0 2 >> >> This happens with 2.6.10, 2.6.11 and 2.6.11-bk2. Controller is a >> Symbios Logic 53c1030 PCI-X Fusion-MPT Dual Ultra320 SCSI. >> >> Why is there such a large difference? >> > > Holger, this problem remains unresolved, does it not? Have you done any > more experimentation? > No. For now I just leave it as module. > I must say that something funny seems to be happening here. I have two > MPT-based Dell machines, neither of which is using a modular driver: > > > akpm:/usr/src/25> 0 hdparm -t /dev/sda > > /dev/sda: > Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.00 seconds = 12.80 MB/sec > Got the same result when compiled in, always between 12 and 13 MB/s. As module it is approx. 75 MB/s. Hope that LSI Logic will find the problem. Another question I have is there a way in what SCSI mode (320, 160, etc) Fusion-MPT is running? Could not find anything in proc or dmesg. Adaptec has the following information in dmesg (and more in proc): (scsi1:A:0): 320.000MB/s transfers (160.000MHz DT|IU|QAS, 16bit) Or has the Fusion-MPT some other tool to show this information? Holger ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: Fusion-MPT much faster as module 2005-03-22 8:31 ` Holger Kiehl @ 2005-03-22 10:29 ` Chen, Kenneth W 2005-03-22 10:42 ` Andrew Morton ` (2 more replies) 0 siblings, 3 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Chen, Kenneth W @ 2005-03-22 10:29 UTC (permalink / raw) To: 'Holger Kiehl', Andrew Morton Cc: linux-kernel, linux-scsi, Moore, Eric Dean On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: > Holger, this problem remains unresolved, does it not? Have you done any > more experimentation? > > I must say that something funny seems to be happening here. I have two > MPT-based Dell machines, neither of which is using a modular driver: > > akpm:/usr/src/25> 0 hdparm -t /dev/sda > > /dev/sda: > Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.00 seconds = 12.80 MB/sec Holger Kiehl wrote on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 12:31 AM > Got the same result when compiled in, always between 12 and 13 MB/s. As > module it is approx. 75 MB/s. Half guess, half with data to prove: it must be the variable driver_setup initialization. If compiled as built-in, driver_setup is initialized to zero for all of its member variables, which isn't the fastest setting. If compiled as module, it gets first class treatment with shinny performance setting. Goofing around, this patch appears to be giving higher throughput. Before: /dev/sdc: Timing buffered disk reads: 92 MB in 3.03 seconds = 30.32 MB/sec After: /dev/sdc: Timing buffered disk reads: 174 MB in 3.02 seconds = 57.61 MB/sec diff -Nurp linux-2.6.11/drivers/message/fusion/mptscsih.c linux-2.6.11.ken/drivers/message/fusion/mptscsih.c --- linux-2.6.11/drivers/message/fusion/mptscsih.c 2005-03-01 23:38:37.000000000 -0800 +++ linux-2.6.11.ken/drivers/message/fusion/mptscsih.c 2005-03-22 02:18:21.000000000 -0800 @@ -96,7 +96,6 @@ MODULE_AUTHOR(MODULEAUTHOR); MODULE_DESCRIPTION(my_NAME); MODULE_LICENSE("GPL"); -#ifdef MODULE static int dv = MPTSCSIH_DOMAIN_VALIDATION; module_param(dv, int, 0); MODULE_PARM_DESC(dv, "DV Algorithm: enhanced = 1, basic = 0 (default=MPTSCSIH_DOMAIN_VALIDATION=1)"); @@ -112,7 +111,6 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(factor, "Min Sync Facto static int saf_te = MPTSCSIH_SAF_TE; module_param(saf_te, int, 0); MODULE_PARM_DESC(saf_te, "Force enabling SEP Processor: (default=MPTSCSIH_SAF_TE=0)"); -#endif /*=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=*/ @@ -1489,7 +1487,6 @@ mptscsih_init(void) ": Registered for IOC reset notifications\n")); } -#ifdef MODULE dinitprintk((KERN_INFO MYNAM ": Command Line Args: dv=%d max_width=%d " "factor=0x%x saf_te=%d\n", @@ -1499,7 +1496,6 @@ mptscsih_init(void) driver_setup.max_width = (width) ? 1 : 0; driver_setup.min_sync_factor = factor; driver_setup.saf_te = (saf_te) ? 1 : 0;; -#endif if(mpt_device_driver_register(&mptscsih_driver, MPTSCSIH_DRIVER) != 0 ) { ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module 2005-03-22 10:29 ` Chen, Kenneth W @ 2005-03-22 10:42 ` Andrew Morton 2005-03-22 10:52 ` Arjan van de Ven 2005-03-22 13:46 ` Fusion-MPT much faster as module Holger Kiehl 2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2005-03-22 10:42 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chen, Kenneth W; +Cc: Holger.Kiehl, linux-kernel, linux-scsi, emoore "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com> wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Holger, this problem remains unresolved, does it not? Have you done any > > more experimentation? > > > > I must say that something funny seems to be happening here. I have two > > MPT-based Dell machines, neither of which is using a modular driver: > > > > akpm:/usr/src/25> 0 hdparm -t /dev/sda > > > > /dev/sda: > > Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.00 seconds = 12.80 MB/sec > > > Holger Kiehl wrote on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 12:31 AM > > Got the same result when compiled in, always between 12 and 13 MB/s. As > > module it is approx. 75 MB/s. > > > Half guess, half with data to prove: it must be the variable driver_setup > initialization. If compiled as built-in, driver_setup is initialized to > zero for all of its member variables, which isn't the fastest setting. If > compiled as module, it gets first class treatment with shinny performance > setting. Goofing around, this patch appears to be giving higher throughput. ooh, you actually looked at the code ;) > Before: > /dev/sdc: > Timing buffered disk reads: 92 MB in 3.03 seconds = 30.32 MB/sec > > After: > /dev/sdc: > Timing buffered disk reads: 174 MB in 3.02 seconds = 57.61 MB/sec > Yes, that's it. Eric, you owe me about 10000 hours ;) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: Fusion-MPT much faster as module 2005-03-22 10:29 ` Chen, Kenneth W 2005-03-22 10:42 ` Andrew Morton @ 2005-03-22 10:52 ` Arjan van de Ven 2005-03-22 12:28 ` Adrian Bunk 2005-03-22 13:46 ` Fusion-MPT much faster as module Holger Kiehl 2 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: Arjan van de Ven @ 2005-03-22 10:52 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chen, Kenneth W Cc: 'Holger Kiehl', Andrew Morton, linux-kernel, linux-scsi, Moore, Eric Dean On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 02:29 -0800, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > Before: > /dev/sdc: > Timing buffered disk reads: 92 MB in 3.03 seconds = 30.32 MB/sec > > After: > /dev/sdc: > Timing buffered disk reads: 174 MB in 3.02 seconds = 57.61 MB/sec nice! More proof that #ifdef MODULE is considered harmful... how much of it is actually left in the kernel? Maybe we could kill it entirely from drivers/* (of course it has a limited place in include/*) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module 2005-03-22 10:52 ` Arjan van de Ven @ 2005-03-22 12:28 ` Adrian Bunk 2005-03-22 12:37 ` Arjan van de Ven 2005-03-22 19:36 ` Fusion-MPT much faster as module - ifdef MODULE considered harmful Bryan Henderson 0 siblings, 2 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Adrian Bunk @ 2005-03-22 12:28 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Arjan van de Ven Cc: Chen, Kenneth W, 'Holger Kiehl', Andrew Morton, linux-kernel, linux-scsi, Moore, Eric Dean On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 11:52:22AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 02:29 -0800, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > > > Before: > > /dev/sdc: > > Timing buffered disk reads: 92 MB in 3.03 seconds = 30.32 MB/sec > > > > After: > > /dev/sdc: > > Timing buffered disk reads: 174 MB in 3.02 seconds = 57.61 MB/sec > > > nice! > > More proof that #ifdef MODULE is considered harmful... how much of it is > actually left in the kernel? Maybe we could kill it entirely from > drivers/* (of course it has a limited place in include/*) Too many... And there are places where it's actually useful: #if defined(CONFIG_FOO) || (defined(MODULE) && defined(CONFIG_FOO_MODULE)) is a good way to express that driver bar can use functionality of driver foo if it's available. cu Adrian -- "Is there not promise of rain?" Ling Tan asked suddenly out of the darkness. There had been need of rain for many days. "Only a promise," Lao Er said. Pearl S. Buck - Dragon Seed ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module 2005-03-22 12:28 ` Adrian Bunk @ 2005-03-22 12:37 ` Arjan van de Ven 2005-03-22 19:36 ` Fusion-MPT much faster as module - ifdef MODULE considered harmful Bryan Henderson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Arjan van de Ven @ 2005-03-22 12:37 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adrian Bunk Cc: Chen, Kenneth W, 'Holger Kiehl', Andrew Morton, linux-kernel, linux-scsi, Moore, Eric Dean > > And there are places where it's actually useful: > > #if defined(CONFIG_FOO) || (defined(MODULE) && defined(CONFIG_FOO_MODULE)) > > is a good way to express that driver bar can use functionality of driver > foo if it's available. a good way? I'd disagree with that :) ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module - ifdef MODULE considered harmful 2005-03-22 12:28 ` Adrian Bunk 2005-03-22 12:37 ` Arjan van de Ven @ 2005-03-22 19:36 ` Bryan Henderson 1 sibling, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Bryan Henderson @ 2005-03-22 19:36 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Adrian Bunk Cc: Andrew Morton, Arjan van de Ven, Moore, Eric Dean, 'Holger Kiehl', Chen, Kenneth W, linux-scsi > #if defined(CONFIG_FOO) || (defined(MODULE) && defined(CONFIG_FOO_MODULE)) > >is a good way to express that driver bar can use functionality of driver >foo if it's available. We need a way for a module to dynamically link itself, to whatever other modules it wants to use, and to be able to do that conditionally based on whether those other modules are loaded at the time it wants to use them. Then we would not only get rid of one of the remaining distinctions between binding a module into the base kernel and loading it dynamically, but also this possibly last excuse for defined(MODULE). As far as I know, we still don't have any kind of a generic registration service like this in the kernel. I've had to resort to faking ioctls and proc file reads inside the kernel in order to get an address from another dynamically loaded module. -- Bryan Henderson IBM Almaden Research Center San Jose CA Filesystems ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: Fusion-MPT much faster as module 2005-03-22 10:29 ` Chen, Kenneth W 2005-03-22 10:42 ` Andrew Morton 2005-03-22 10:52 ` Arjan van de Ven @ 2005-03-22 13:46 ` Holger Kiehl 2 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Holger Kiehl @ 2005-03-22 13:46 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Chen, Kenneth W Cc: Andrew Morton, linux-kernel, linux-scsi, Moore, Eric Dean On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: >> Holger, this problem remains unresolved, does it not? Have you done any >> more experimentation? >> >> I must say that something funny seems to be happening here. I have two >> MPT-based Dell machines, neither of which is using a modular driver: >> >> akpm:/usr/src/25> 0 hdparm -t /dev/sda >> >> /dev/sda: >> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.00 seconds = 12.80 MB/sec > > > Holger Kiehl wrote on Tuesday, March 22, 2005 12:31 AM >> Got the same result when compiled in, always between 12 and 13 MB/s. As >> module it is approx. 75 MB/s. > > > Half guess, half with data to prove: it must be the variable driver_setup > initialization. If compiled as built-in, driver_setup is initialized to > zero for all of its member variables, which isn't the fastest setting. If > compiled as module, it gets first class treatment with shinny performance > setting. Goofing around, this patch appears to be giving higher throughput. > Yes, that fixes it. Many thanks! Holger ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* RE: Fusion-MPT much faster as module
@ 2005-03-21 23:46 Moore, Eric Dean
2005-03-31 18:59 ` augustus
0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread
From: Moore, Eric Dean @ 2005-03-21 23:46 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: Andrew Morton, Holger Kiehl, augustus; +Cc: linux-scsi
Sorry for delay in responding.
We at LSI Logic are looking into these reports
of poor performance coming from the U320.
I will report later.
Eric Moore
LSI Logic
On Monday, March 21, 2005 4:27 PM, Andrew Morton wrote:
>
>
> Holger Kiehl <Holger.Kiehl@dwd.de> wrote:
> >
> > Hello
> >
> > On a four CPU Opteron compiling the Fusion-MPT as module
> gives much better
> > performance when compiling it in, here some bonnie++ results:
> >
> > Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------
> --Sequential Input- --Random-
> > -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per
> Chr- --Block-- --Seeks--
> > Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP
> K/sec %CP /sec %CP
> > compiled in 15872M 38366 71 65602 22 18348 4 53276 84
> 57947 7 905.4 2
> > module 15872M 51246 96 204914 70 57236 14 59779 96
> 264171 33 923.0 2
> >
> > This happens with 2.6.10, 2.6.11 and 2.6.11-bk2. Controller is a
> > Symbios Logic 53c1030 PCI-X Fusion-MPT Dual Ultra320 SCSI.
> >
> > Why is there such a large difference?
> >
>
> Holger, this problem remains unresolved, does it not? Have
> you done any
> more experimentation?
>
> I must say that something funny seems to be happening here.
> I have two
> MPT-based Dell machines, neither of which is using a modular driver:
>
>
> akpm:/usr/src/25> 0 hdparm -t /dev/sda
>
> /dev/sda:
> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.00 seconds = 12.80 MB/sec
>
> That's a bit disappointing. Running 2.6.9-rc2-mm2(!) with a
>
> SCSI storage controller: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic 53c1030 (rev 07)
>
> controller on disks which shudl hit 50MB/sec.
>
>
>
>
> And
>
> bix:/home/akpm# hdparm -t /dev/sda
>
> /dev/sda:
> Timing buffered disk reads: 114 MB in 3.03 seconds = 37.57 MB/sec
>
> with 2.6.11-rc4-mm1 using
>
> Fusion MPT SCSI Host driver 3.01.16
> scsi0 : ioc0: LSI53C1030, FwRev=01030600h, Ports=1, MaxQ=222, IRQ=25
> scsi1 : ioc1: LSI53C1030, FwRev=01030600h, Ports=1, MaxQ=222, IRQ=26
> Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST3146807LW Rev: DS09
> Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 03
>
> Better, but again I'd expect >50MB/sec.
>
^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread* RE: Fusion-MPT much faster as module 2005-03-21 23:46 Moore, Eric Dean @ 2005-03-31 18:59 ` augustus 2005-03-31 20:22 ` Andrew Morton 0 siblings, 1 reply; 13+ messages in thread From: augustus @ 2005-03-31 18:59 UTC (permalink / raw) To: Moore, Eric Dean; +Cc: Andrew Morton, Holger Kiehl, linux-scsi Any word on this bug yet? Thanks, Kris Kersey (Augustus) LinuxHardware.org Site Manager augustus@linuxhardware.org Gentoo Linux AMD64 Developer augustus@gentoo.org On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Moore, Eric Dean wrote: > Sorry for delay in responding. > We at LSI Logic are looking into these reports > of poor performance coming from the U320. > I will report later. > > Eric Moore > LSI Logic > > > On Monday, March 21, 2005 4:27 PM, Andrew Morton wrote: >> >> >> Holger Kiehl <Holger.Kiehl@dwd.de> wrote: >>> >>> Hello >>> >>> On a four CPU Opteron compiling the Fusion-MPT as module >> gives much better >>> performance when compiling it in, here some bonnie++ results: >>> >>> Version 1.03 ------Sequential Output------ >> --Sequential Input- --Random- >>> -Per Chr- --Block-- -Rewrite- -Per >> Chr- --Block-- --Seeks-- >>> Machine Size K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP K/sec %CP >> K/sec %CP /sec %CP >>> compiled in 15872M 38366 71 65602 22 18348 4 53276 84 >> 57947 7 905.4 2 >>> module 15872M 51246 96 204914 70 57236 14 59779 96 >> 264171 33 923.0 2 >>> >>> This happens with 2.6.10, 2.6.11 and 2.6.11-bk2. Controller is a >>> Symbios Logic 53c1030 PCI-X Fusion-MPT Dual Ultra320 SCSI. >>> >>> Why is there such a large difference? >>> >> >> Holger, this problem remains unresolved, does it not? Have >> you done any >> more experimentation? >> >> I must say that something funny seems to be happening here. >> I have two >> MPT-based Dell machines, neither of which is using a modular driver: >> >> >> akpm:/usr/src/25> 0 hdparm -t /dev/sda >> >> /dev/sda: >> Timing buffered disk reads: 64 MB in 5.00 seconds = 12.80 MB/sec >> >> That's a bit disappointing. Running 2.6.9-rc2-mm2(!) with a >> >> SCSI storage controller: LSI Logic / Symbios Logic 53c1030 (rev 07) >> >> controller on disks which shudl hit 50MB/sec. >> >> >> >> >> And >> >> bix:/home/akpm# hdparm -t /dev/sda >> >> /dev/sda: >> Timing buffered disk reads: 114 MB in 3.03 seconds = 37.57 MB/sec >> >> with 2.6.11-rc4-mm1 using >> >> Fusion MPT SCSI Host driver 3.01.16 >> scsi0 : ioc0: LSI53C1030, FwRev=01030600h, Ports=1, MaxQ=222, IRQ=25 >> scsi1 : ioc1: LSI53C1030, FwRev=01030600h, Ports=1, MaxQ=222, IRQ=26 >> Vendor: SEAGATE Model: ST3146807LW Rev: DS09 >> Type: Direct-Access ANSI SCSI revision: 03 >> >> Better, but again I'd expect >50MB/sec. >> > ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
* Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module 2005-03-31 18:59 ` augustus @ 2005-03-31 20:22 ` Andrew Morton 0 siblings, 0 replies; 13+ messages in thread From: Andrew Morton @ 2005-03-31 20:22 UTC (permalink / raw) To: augustus; +Cc: Eric.Moore, Holger.Kiehl, linux-scsi augustus@linuxhardware.org wrote: > > Any word on this bug yet? Linus merged the fix yesterday. ^ permalink raw reply [flat|nested] 13+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2005-03-31 20:22 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 13+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
[not found] <Pine.LNX.4.61.0503081327560.28812@praktifix.dwd.de>
2005-03-21 23:27 ` Fusion-MPT much faster as module Andrew Morton
2005-03-22 7:32 ` Janne Pikkarainen
2005-03-22 8:31 ` Holger Kiehl
2005-03-22 10:29 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2005-03-22 10:42 ` Andrew Morton
2005-03-22 10:52 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-03-22 12:28 ` Adrian Bunk
2005-03-22 12:37 ` Arjan van de Ven
2005-03-22 19:36 ` Fusion-MPT much faster as module - ifdef MODULE considered harmful Bryan Henderson
2005-03-22 13:46 ` Fusion-MPT much faster as module Holger Kiehl
2005-03-21 23:46 Moore, Eric Dean
2005-03-31 18:59 ` augustus
2005-03-31 20:22 ` Andrew Morton
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox