2.4 cpu usage...

2.4 cpu usage...

[LA Walsh]

I decided put 2.4 on my laptop.  After getting config issues seemingly
sorted out, still have some things I can't explain.  VMware seems to run
about 30% slower.  X was even sluggish at times.  When I'm doing 'nothing',
top shows about 67% IDLE and 30% in 'system time'.  I notice that
the process "kapm-idled" is being counted as receiving alot of CPU time.
Now this could make some sense maybe that idled is getting 30% of the time,
but then there's the remaining 67% that came up idle.

I shut down X -- then top showed 5% idle and 95% in "kapm-idled"  (and
95% system time) which could still make sense but is probably not the output
you want to see when your computer is really idle.

So the kapm thing could be a "display" / accounting problem, but the
slowdown in vmware/X was real.  I ran a WIN Norton "Benchmark" -- comes
up reliably over "300" -- usually around 320-350 under 2.2.17.  Under
2.4, it came up reliably *under* 300 with typical being about 265".

So...I'm bummed.  I'm assuming a 30% degradation in an app is probably
not expected behavior?  Swap usage is '0' in both OS's (i.e. it's not
a run out of memory issue).

-l

--
L A Walsh                        | Trust Technology, Core Linux, SGI
law@sgi.com                      | Voice/Vmail: (650) 933-5338

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: 2.4 cpu usage...

[Barry K. Nathan]

LA Walsh wrote:
[snip]
> So the kapm thing could be a "display" / accounting problem, but the
> slowdown in vmware/X was real.  I ran a WIN Norton "Benchmark" -- comes
> up reliably over "300" -- usually around 320-350 under 2.2.17.  Under
> 2.4, it came up reliably *under* 300 with typical being about 265".
> 
> So...I'm bummed.  I'm assuming a 30% degradation in an app is probably
> not expected behavior?  Swap usage is '0' in both OS's (i.e. it's not
> a run out of memory issue).

I actually saw a similar type of slowdown on my Inspiron 5000e with 2.4
(test10preX or test11preX, where I forget what X was, probably 5 or so).

Specifically, the following command read off the disk more slowly:

gzip -1 < /dev/hda | nc some_other_box some_port -w 1

even when I got rid of the gzip -1 (redirecting /dev/hda straight into nc,
or piping cat into nc).

In my case, the slowdown was clearly visible - the disk light was at full
brightness under 2.2.16, but not 2.4.0testwhatever.

I wanted to try again without any APM stuff in the kernel (or at least,
not APM CPU idling) before reporting it, but I never got a chance to do
that.

-Barry K. Nathan <barryn@pobox.com>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: 2.4 disk speed 66% slowdown...

[Linda Walsh]

I think we're on to something.  I did gen's of the kernel with
the following configs: 1) 2.2.17 (w/apm), 2) 2.4(w/apm), 3) 2.4(w/o apm).
The apm seems to be a red herring in terms of actual performance
hit.  It seems to count apm time as 'system' time instead of 'idle'.

Kernel gen times were:
1) real    6m33.046s, user    6m1.380s, sys     0m18.450s
2)         6m45s real         6m12s user        0m26s sys  
3) real    6m49.275s, user    6m14.740s, sys    0m26.690s

The REAL problem was in disk performance.  The apm made no difference:

hdparm -t /dev/hda1 /dev/hda3 /dev/hda4 /dev/hda5 /dev/hda7
1) 2.2.17
/dev/hda1: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  4.76 seconds = 13.45 MB/sec
/dev/hda3: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  4.57 seconds = 14.00 MB/sec
/dev/hda4: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  6.47 seconds =  9.89 MB/sec
/dev/hda5: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  5.08 seconds = 12.60 MB/sec
/dev/hda7: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  5.10 seconds = 12.55 MB/sec

2) 2.4 w/apm
/dev/hda1: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 16.03 seconds =  3.99 MB/sec
/dev/hda3: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.87 seconds =  4.03 MB/sec
/dev/hda4: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.67 seconds =  4.08 MB/sec
/dev/hda5: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.82 seconds =  4.05 MB/sec
/dev/hda7: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.85 seconds =  4.04 MB/sec

3) 2.4 w/o apm
/dev/hda1: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 16.02 seconds =  4.00 MB/sec
/dev/hda3: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.88 seconds =  4.03 MB/sec
/dev/hda4: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.67 seconds =  4.08 MB/sec
/dev/hda5: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.85 seconds =  4.04 MB/sec
/dev/hda7: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.86 seconds =  4.04 MB/sec   

Mine is on a ide1 device on a Dell Insp. 7500:
 hdparm -i /dev/hda (from 2.2.17)
 
/dev/hda:
 
 Model=IBM-DARA-225000, FwRev=SHAOA54A, SerialNo=SQASQ202564
 Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs }
 RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=4
 BuffType=3(DualPortCache), BuffSize=418kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=off
 DblWordIO=no, OldPIO=2, DMA=yes, OldDMA=2
 CurCHS=17475/15/63, CurSects=16513875, LBA=yes, LBAsects=49577472
 tDMA={min:120,rec:120}, DMA modes: mword0 mword1 mword2
 IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:240,w/IORDY:120}, PIO modes: mode3 mode4
 UDMA modes: mode0 mode1 *mode2 mode3 mode4
 Drive Supports : ATA/ATAPI-4 T13 1153D revision 17 : ATA-1 ATA-2 ATA-3 ATA-4


"Barry K. Nathan" wrote:
> Specifically, the following command read off the disk more slowly:
> 
> gzip -1 < /dev/hda | nc some_other_box some_port -w 1
...
-- 
Linda A Walsh                    | Trust Technology, Core Linux, SGI
law@sgi.com                      | Voice: (650) 933-5338
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: 2.4 disk speed 66% slowdown...

[Florin Andrei]

Linda Walsh wrote:
> 
> The REAL problem was in disk performance.  The apm made no difference:

	Same problem here. I had a huge HDD performance drop when upgrading
from 2.2.18 to 2.4.0
	It's an Intel i815 motherboard, and the HDD is Ultra-ATA.

-- 
Florin Andrei
"Saying everything is a database is saying nothing at all
and certainly will not improve communication with others.
Database, database database. Database! See?" (Marc Lehmann)
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: 2.4 disk speed 66% slowdown...

[Andre Hedrick]

On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Florin Andrei wrote:

> Linda Walsh wrote:
> > 
> > The REAL problem was in disk performance.  The apm made no difference:
> 
> 	Same problem here. I had a huge HDD performance drop when upgrading
> from 2.2.18 to 2.4.0
> 	It's an Intel i815 motherboard, and the HDD is Ultra-ATA.

ER, were you getting UDMA-100-66 out of 2.2.18 stock?
Now what are you getting in 2.4.0?

Andre Hedrick
Linux ATA Development

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: 2.4 disk speed 66% slowdown...

[Linda Walsh]

Mine was actually out of a stock 2.2.17 -- I tried your patch in an attempt
to fix a disk problem - but the disk was just going bad and the slow speeds were
coming from the automatic sector remapping.  

pardon my ignorance, but where do you get UDMA-100-66?

Here is the hdparm -i output on 2.4:

/dev/hda:
 
 Model=IBM-DARA-225000, FwRev=SHAOA54A, SerialNo=SQASQ202564
 Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs }
 RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=4
 BuffType=3(DualPortCache), BuffSize=418kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=off
 DblWordIO=no, OldPIO=2, DMA=yes, OldDMA=2
 CurCHS=17475/15/63, CurSects=16513875, LBA=yes, LBAsects=49577472
 tDMA={min:120,rec:120}, DMA modes: mword0 mword1 mword2
 IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:240,w/IORDY:120}, PIO modes: mode3 mode4
 UDMA modes: mode0 mode1 *mode2 mode3 mode4
 Drive Supports : ATA/ATAPI-4 T13 1153D revision 17 : ATA-1 ATA-2 ATA-3 ATA-4 

UDMA mode (2) seems to be identical to before.


Andre Hedrick wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Florin Andrei wrote:
> 
> > Linda Walsh wrote:
> > >
> > > The REAL problem was in disk performance.  The apm made no difference:
> >
> >       Same problem here. I had a huge HDD performance drop when upgrading
> > from 2.2.18 to 2.4.0
> >       It's an Intel i815 motherboard, and the HDD is Ultra-ATA.
> 
> ER, were you getting UDMA-100-66 out of 2.2.18 stock?
> Now what are you getting in 2.4.0?

-- 
Linda A Walsh                    | Trust Technology, Core Linux, SGI
law@sgi.com                      | Voice: (650) 933-5338
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: 2.4 disk speed 66% slowdown...

[Andre Hedrick]

On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Linda Walsh wrote:

> Mine was actually out of a stock 2.2.17 -- I tried your patch in an attempt
> to fix a disk problem - but the disk was just going bad and the slow speeds were
> coming from the automatic sector remapping.  
> 
> pardon my ignorance, but where do you get UDMA-100-66?

Well:
> > >       It's an Intel i815 motherboard, and the HDD is Ultra-ATA.

i815 is an Ultra DMA 100 SouthBridge core.

> Here is the hdparm -i output on 2.4:
> 
> /dev/hda:
>  
>  Model=IBM-DARA-225000, FwRev=SHAOA54A, SerialNo=SQASQ202564
>  Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs }
>  RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=4
>  BuffType=3(DualPortCache), BuffSize=418kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=off
>  DblWordIO=no, OldPIO=2, DMA=yes, OldDMA=2
>  CurCHS=17475/15/63, CurSects=16513875, LBA=yes, LBAsects=49577472
>  tDMA={min:120,rec:120}, DMA modes: mword0 mword1 mword2
>  IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:240,w/IORDY:120}, PIO modes: mode3 mode4
>  UDMA modes: mode0 mode1 *mode2 mode3 mode4
>  Drive Supports : ATA/ATAPI-4 T13 1153D revision 17 : ATA-1 ATA-2 ATA-3 ATA-4 
> 
> UDMA mode (2) seems to be identical to before.

Also, if your drive is caught in the question state of where the standard
changes, the validity bits for determining the host/drive detection pair
for the presense willl be fuzzy as is my explaination.

> 
> 
> Andre Hedrick wrote:
> > 
> > On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Florin Andrei wrote:
> > 
> > > Linda Walsh wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The REAL problem was in disk performance.  The apm made no difference:
> > >
> > >       Same problem here. I had a huge HDD performance drop when upgrading
> > > from 2.2.18 to 2.4.0
> > >       It's an Intel i815 motherboard, and the HDD is Ultra-ATA.
> > 
> > ER, were you getting UDMA-100-66 out of 2.2.18 stock?
> > Now what are you getting in 2.4.0?
> 
> -- 
> Linda A Walsh                    | Trust Technology, Core Linux, SGI
> law@sgi.com                      | Voice: (650) 933-5338
> 

Andre Hedrick
Linux ATA Development

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: 2.4 disk speed 66% slowdown...

[Barry K. Nathan]

Linda Walsh wrote:
> I think we're on to something.  I did gen's of the kernel with
[snip]
> The REAL problem was in disk performance.  The apm made no difference:
> 
> hdparm -t /dev/hda1 /dev/hda3 /dev/hda4 /dev/hda5 /dev/hda7
> 1) 2.2.17
> /dev/hda1: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  4.76 seconds = 13.45 MB/sec
> /dev/hda3: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  4.57 seconds = 14.00 MB/sec
> /dev/hda4: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  6.47 seconds =  9.89 MB/sec
> /dev/hda5: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  5.08 seconds = 12.60 MB/sec
> /dev/hda7: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  5.10 seconds = 12.55 MB/sec
> 
> 2) 2.4 w/apm
> /dev/hda1: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 16.03 seconds =  3.99 MB/sec
> /dev/hda3: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.87 seconds =  4.03 MB/sec
> /dev/hda4: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.67 seconds =  4.08 MB/sec
> /dev/hda5: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.82 seconds =  4.05 MB/sec
> /dev/hda7: Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 15.85 seconds =  4.04 MB/sec
[snip]

Your slowdown's different from mine, then. hdparm gives me 16.5 MB/sec
(or so) for both 2.2 & 2.4 (with APM in both cases). I must stress that
I haven't tried 2.4.0 or 2.4.1pre on my Inspiron 5000e yet, so I don't
even know if the problem that caused my slowdown still exists.

(Just to clarify my case: 750MHz Pentium III, 256MB RAM, 32GB IBM HD,
Intel 440BX chipset. If you need more data, I'll collect it when I get a
chance, but I'd be surprised if 2.4.1 doesn't come out first.)

While I'm writing this email, I may as well mention that I have a problem
with booting my Inspiron 5000e under 2.4 (all of my actual 2.4test usage
on that machines has been with Slackware 7.1's Disc 2 and the
corresponding rootdisk). That machine has Red Hat 7.0 installed on an ext2
disk image file, stored on a vfat partition and loop mounted. (Actually,
/usr and a subdirectory of /home are each on different image files now,
for 3 total, but booting never gets far enough for that to be relevant.)

The RAM disk I use for booting off the hard drive is the default one set
up by the Red Hat 7 installer, except there are no modules on it (I
compile in everything that's needed for booting) and the last line of
linuxrc has an echo statement. After that echo statement runs, I get the
following error message under 2.4.0, but not 2.2.1[678]: (from memory, so
the exact message might be slightly different)

panic: I have no root and I must scream

If I comment out that panic, I get some rather interestng messages, but I
don't remember any of them. I wasn't planning on reporting this until I
got a chance to put together a self-contained package & instructions for
reproducing the problem, but since I'm writing an email to the list, here
it is...

-Barry K. Nathan <barryn@pobox.com>
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: 2.4 disk speed 66% slowdown...

[Benson Chow]

Just as a datapoint, my Via IDE chipset (on atb850/kt133) and Promise
Ultra66 (on 2xpp200/82440FX/PIIX3) works fine with 2.4.0, getting speeds
about correct:

 Model=IBM-DTLA-307045, FwRev=TX6OA60A
 [snip.  unused info cut]
 PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
 DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 *udma4 udma5
 Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  1.78 seconds = 35.96 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  1.79 seconds = 35.75 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  1.79 seconds = 35.75 MB/sec

 Model=QUANTUM FIREBALLP LM30, FwRev=A35.0700
 [snip.  unused info cut]
 tDMA={min:120,rec:120}, DMA modes: mword0 mword1 mword2
 IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, PIO modes: mode3 mode4
 UDMA modes: mode0 mode1 mode2 mode3 *mode4

 Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  4.30 seconds = 14.88 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  4.34 seconds = 14.75 MB/sec

Quite slow for the drive is capable of, but it's very fast for the
computer.  All I care for that machine is it to be able to sustain a
100Mbit file transfer to it at near full speed :)

Some things I did notice is that sometimes I forget to mark down some of
the options (dma especially) while compiling the kernel - and this killed
my disk transfer rate...

(Also something weird: my Fujitsu just doesn't seem to want to get into
UDMA66 (stays in udma33) in linux, but its head read rate is maxed out at
19MB/sec anyway, so it doesn't matter.  It's also on the same IDE channel
as the IBM on the Via.  I really wonder why it's:

 Model=FUJITSU MPD3137AH, FwRev=DH-05-09
 [snip.  unused info cut]
 PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
 DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 udma0 udma1 *udma2 udma3 udma4
 Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  3.23 seconds = 19.81 MB/sec

Maybe a firmware bug...
)

ydsmv

-bc

On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Linda Walsh wrote:

> Date: Tue, 23 Jan 2001 20:17:01 -0800
> From: Linda Walsh <law@sgi.com>
> To: Andre Hedrick <andre@linux-ide.org>
> Cc: Florin Andrei <florin@sgi.com>, lkml <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
> Subject: Re: 2.4 disk speed 66% slowdown...
>
> Mine was actually out of a stock 2.2.17 -- I tried your patch in an attempt
> to fix a disk problem - but the disk was just going bad and the slow speeds were
> coming from the automatic sector remapping.
>
> pardon my ignorance, but where do you get UDMA-100-66?
>
> Here is the hdparm -i output on 2.4:
>
> /dev/hda:
>
>  Model=IBM-DARA-225000, FwRev=SHAOA54A, SerialNo=SQASQ202564
>  Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs }
>  RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=0, SectSize=0, ECCbytes=4
>  BuffType=3(DualPortCache), BuffSize=418kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=off
>  DblWordIO=no, OldPIO=2, DMA=yes, OldDMA=2
>  CurCHS=17475/15/63, CurSects=16513875, LBA=yes, LBAsects=49577472
>  tDMA={min:120,rec:120}, DMA modes: mword0 mword1 mword2
>  IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:240,w/IORDY:120}, PIO modes: mode3 mode4
>  UDMA modes: mode0 mode1 *mode2 mode3 mode4
>  Drive Supports : ATA/ATAPI-4 T13 1153D revision 17 : ATA-1 ATA-2 ATA-3 ATA-4
>
> UDMA mode (2) seems to be identical to before.
>
>
> Andre Hedrick wrote:
> >
> > On Tue, 23 Jan 2001, Florin Andrei wrote:
> >
> > > Linda Walsh wrote:
> > > >
> > > > The REAL problem was in disk performance.  The apm made no difference:
> > >
> > >       Same problem here. I had a huge HDD performance drop when upgrading
> > > from 2.2.18 to 2.4.0
> > >       It's an Intel i815 motherboard, and the HDD is Ultra-ATA.
> >
> > ER, were you getting UDMA-100-66 out of 2.2.18 stock?
> > Now what are you getting in 2.4.0?
>
> --
> Linda A Walsh                    | Trust Technology, Core Linux, SGI
> law@sgi.com                      | Voice: (650) 933-5338
> -
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
>

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: 2.4 disk speed 66% slowdown...

[Miles Lane]

Benson Chow wrote:

> Just as a datapoint, my Via IDE chipset (on atb850/kt133) and Promise
> Ultra66 (on 2xpp200/82440FX/PIIX3) works fine with 2.4.0, getting speeds
> about correct:


<snip>

>  Model=QUANTUM FIREBALLP LM30, FwRev=A35.0700
>  [snip.  unused info cut]
>  tDMA={min:120,rec:120}, DMA modes: mword0 mword1 mword2
>  IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, PIO modes: mode3 mode4
>  UDMA modes: mode0 mode1 mode2 mode3 *mode4
> 
>  Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  4.30 seconds = 14.88 MB/sec
>  Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  4.34 seconds = 14.75 MB/sec

Hi,

I have the same drive, but "hdparm -i" gives different output:

  Model=QUANTUM FIREBALLP LM30, FwRev=A35.0700, SerialNo=186006831114
  Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec Fixed DTR>10Mbs }
  RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=32256, SectSize=21298, ECCbytes=4
  BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=1900kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=off
  CurCHS=16383/16/63, CurSects=16514064, LBA=yes, LBAsects=58633344
  IORDY=on/off, tPIO={min:120,w/IORDY:120}, tDMA={min:120,rec:120}
  PIO modes: pio0 pio1 pio2 pio3 pio4
  DMA modes: mdma0 mdma1 mdma2 udma0 udma1 udma2 udma3 *udma4

There is no mention of "UDMA modes."

However, my throughput seems to be much faster than yours for some reason:

  Timing buffer-cache reads:   128 MB in  0.91 seconds =140.66 MB/sec
  Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  2.49 seconds = 25.70 MB/sec

My machine is an Athlon (booting says "Detected 848.381 MHz processor").
I'm not sure what the system bus speed is, but I think it's ~100MHz.

00:01.0 PCI bridge: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-751 [Irongate] AGP 
Bridge (rev 01) (prog-if 00 [Normal decode])
	Control: I/O+ Mem+ BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- 
Stepping- SERR+ FastB2B-
	Status: Cap- 66Mhz+ UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- 
<MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
	Latency: 64
	Bus: primary=00, secondary=01, subordinate=01, sec-latency=64
	I/O behind bridge: 0000e000-0000efff
	Memory behind bridge: fca00000-feafffff
	Prefetchable memory behind bridge: e4800000-f48fffff
	BridgeCtl: Parity- SERR+ NoISA- VGA+ MAbort- >Reset- FastB2B-

00:07.1 IDE interface: Advanced Micro Devices [AMD] AMD-756 [Viper] IDE 
(rev 03) (prog-if 8a [Master SecP PriP])
	Control: I/O+ Mem- BusMaster+ SpecCycle- MemWINV- VGASnoop- ParErr- 
Stepping- SERR- FastB2B-
	Status: Cap- 66Mhz- UDF- FastB2B- ParErr- DEVSEL=medium >TAbort- <TAbort- 
<MAbort- >SERR- <PERR-
	Latency: 64
	Region 4: I/O ports at cb00 [size=16]

CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEPCI=y
CONFIG_IDEPCI_SHARE_IRQ=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDMA_PCI=y
CONFIG_IDEDMA_PCI_AUTO=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDEDMA=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_AMD7409=y
CONFIG_IDEDMA_AUTO=y
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_IDE_MODES=y

Cheers,

	Miles

-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Re: 2.4 cpu usage...

[Pavel Machek]

Hi!


> So...I'm bummed.  I'm assuming a 30% degradation in an app is probably
> not expected behavior?  Swap usage is '0' in both OS's (i.e. it's not
> a run out of memory issue).

Vmware is _not_ application, it is dirty kernel hack. Do it without
vmware.
								Pavel

-- 
I'm pavel@ucw.cz. "In my country we have almost anarchy and I don't care."
Panos Katsaloulis describing me w.r.t. patents at discuss@linmodems.org
-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/