From: "Martin A. Fink" <fink@mpe.mpg.de>
To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: SATA-performance with AHCI
Date: Mon, 4 Dec 2006 14:48:20 +0100 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <200612041448.20176.fink@mpe.mpg.de> (raw)
Dear all,
now I was able to do a performance test with an Intel ICH6R chipset.
Basic hardware data:
- Intel Pentium 4 Xeon at 3.2 GHz
- Intel ICH6R chipset, AHCI enabled
- Intel Hyperthreading On and Off
- 1 GB SDDR RAM
- SATA controller onboard (4x)
- SATA harddisks 250 GB
I used SuSE Linux 9.3 with Linux kernel 2.6.11.4-21.14-smp.
I tried to put data from memory to harddisk by writing blocks of 1 MB size
with 2 GB overall filesize. And I got the following results:
SuSE 9.3 - 32-bit Installation - Hyperthreading Off:
- CPU time 16% (sys, approx. 0% user) - Write speed 40-45 MB/s
SuSE 9.3 - 64-bit Installation - Hyperthreading Off:
- CPU time 14% (sys, approx. 0% user) - Write speed 50-60 MB/s
SuSE 9.3 - 64-bit Installation - Hyperthreading ON:
- CPU time 16% (sys, approx. 0% user) - Write speed 40-50 MB/s
Compared to ICH6R with AHCI OFF the only difference I can see is that with
AHCI the system seems to reac much faster on keyboard events and screen
redraw seems to be as fast as normal. It looks like that CPU usage has not
decreased that dramatically as I would have expected it.
Thus I did a small calculation:
Assuming that the processor gives workloads of (a) 1B (b) 1kB (c) 64kB to the
DMA controller in AHCI mode to write 45 MB/s to disk, I calculate for 10% CPU
time usage of the 3.2 GHz Pentium
(a) 10% * 3.2GHz / 45M calls = 7.3 CPU cycles per 1B call to DMA
(b) 10% * 3.2GHz / 45k calls = 7.4E+03 CPU cycles per 1kB call to DMA
(c) 10% * 3.2GHz / 720 calls = 4.8E+05 CPU cycles per 64kB call to DMA
For me (a) looks reasonable (some overhead per byte), but stupid - if
implemented. Giving bigger packages like (b) and (c) looks better to me, but
then I can't understand that huge overhead (1E3 to 1E5 cpu cycles per
package) for one package.
Is this normal or do I still have something wrong in my system?
Thank you for your help,
Martin
next reply other threads:[~2006-12-04 13:48 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2006-12-04 13:48 Martin A. Fink [this message]
2006-12-12 2:17 ` SATA-performance with AHCI Tejun Heo
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=200612041448.20176.fink@mpe.mpg.de \
--to=fink@mpe.mpg.de \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
/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