public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jeff Garzik <jgarzik@pobox.com>
To: Clem Taylor <clemtaylor@comcast.net>
Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: Any news on a higher performance sata_sil SIL_QUIRK_MOD15WRITE workaround?
Date: Thu, 12 Aug 2004 02:43:23 -0400	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <411B118B.4040802@pobox.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <411AFD2C.5060701@comcast.net>

Clem Taylor wrote:
> I've been really disappointed by the performance of the Silicon Image 
> 3114 on my new x86_box. I spent a bunch of time looking into the 
> problem, thinking it was a software RAID5 or xfs issue causing 4K IOs.
> I don't know why I didn't notice the 'applying Seagate errata fix' in 
> dmesg until after I did a bunch of performance testing and realized that 
> it was a sata_sil issue.
> 
> So, I was wondering what I can do about this problem? I am not currently 

Get a different controller + disk combination.


> getting enough disk performance to justify the amount spent on the 
> system or enough to satisfy the application I'm working on. Before I go 
> out and purchase a 3ware controller and re-install the machine (ouch), 
> is there any chance of a better work around in the near future? I'd be 
> more than willing to test out a patch.
> 
> Is the problem with really with nblocks % 15 == 1? Or is the problem 
> with nblocks % 15 == 0? If it is the later and I'm using xfs with 4K 
> blocks, couldn't I just turn off the workaround or will the RAID5 driver 
> potentially break up larger requests?

The problem is that the Silicon Image controller sends unusual -- but 
legal -- block sizes to the SATA device.

Older Seagates cannot cope with this unique, but spec-correct behavior.

This issue cannot even be worked around with "nblocks % 15 == 1", as was 
previously thought.  Using that formula just makes the problem harder to 
reproduce.

Further, I don't have any plans to address the performance issue, since 
the set of affected drives is finite.


> It would seem that the root of the problem is a Seagate issue. Does 
> anyone know if Seagate fixed the problem with a firmware update? 

You could find out for us, and let us know :)

	Jeff



  reply	other threads:[~2004-08-12  6:43 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 10+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2004-08-12  5:16 Any news on a higher performance sata_sil SIL_QUIRK_MOD15WRITE workaround? Clem Taylor
2004-08-12  6:43 ` Jeff Garzik [this message]
2004-08-12 12:00   ` Alan Cox
2004-08-12 15:16     ` Jeff Garzik
2004-08-12 19:59       ` Alan Cox
2004-08-12 21:03         ` Jeff Garzik
2004-08-12 20:37           ` Alan Cox
2004-08-13  4:18   ` Clem Taylor
2004-08-13 12:13     ` Alan Cox
2004-08-16 18:49       ` Eric Mudama

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=411B118B.4040802@pobox.com \
    --to=jgarzik@pobox.com \
    --cc=clemtaylor@comcast.net \
    --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