From: Ondrej Zary <linux@rainbow-software.org>
To: Alan Cox <alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk>
Cc: Nick Piggin <nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au>,
Grant Coady <grant_lkml@dodo.com.au>,
Linux Kernel Mailing List <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Odd IDE performance drop 2.4 vs 2.6?
Date: Fri, 17 Jun 2005 15:43:32 +0200 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <42B2D384.70104@rainbow-software.org> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <1119012053.27908.87.camel@localhost.localdomain>
Alan Cox wrote:
> On Mer, 2005-06-15 at 20:15, Ondrej Zary wrote:
>
>>Now I've tested it with preempt disabled and nothing has changed. When
>>fiddling around with hdparm, I got about 16MB/s max. with 2.6.12-rc5.
>>With 2.4.31, I got about 21MB/s when just the DMA was enabled
>>(read-ahead and multcount set to 0 - changing them does not make almost
>>any difference).
>
>
> multcount is only used for PIO so that would be expected. Similarly the
> block readahead should matter but not anything drive level.
>
> If you compare the hdparm data are both 2.4 and 2.6 selecting the same
> IDE modes ?
This is in my init scripts:
/usr/sbin/hdparm -u1c1k1 /dev/hda /dev/hdc /dev/hdd 1> /dev/null
It selects UDMA2 mode in both 2.4 and 2.6.
hdparm -i /dev/hda shows exactly the same output in both 2.4 and 2.6:
/dev/hda:
Model=WDC WD300BB-00AUA1, FwRev=18.20D18, SerialNo=WD-WMA6W1847372
Config={ HardSect NotMFM HdSw>15uSec SpinMotCtl Fixed DTR>5Mbs FmtGapReq }
RawCHS=16383/16/63, TrkSize=57600, SectSize=600, ECCbytes=40
BuffType=DualPortCache, BuffSize=2048kB, MaxMultSect=16, MultSect=16
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
UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 *udma2
AdvancedPM=no WriteCache=enabled
Drive conforms to: device does not report version:
* signifies the current active mode
--
Ondrej Zary
next prev parent reply other threads:[~2005-06-17 13:43 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 12+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2005-06-13 4:03 Odd IDE performance drop 2.4 vs 2.6? Grant Coady
2005-06-13 10:43 ` Ondrej Zary
2005-06-13 13:39 ` Alan Cox
2005-06-13 14:06 ` Nick Piggin
2005-06-13 15:09 ` Alan Cox
2005-06-13 17:01 ` Ondrej Zary
2005-06-13 20:25 ` Jens Axboe
2005-06-14 2:20 ` Nick Piggin
2005-06-15 19:15 ` Ondrej Zary
2005-06-17 12:40 ` Alan Cox
2005-06-17 13:43 ` Ondrej Zary [this message]
2005-06-13 18:13 ` Grant Coady
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=42B2D384.70104@rainbow-software.org \
--to=linux@rainbow-software.org \
--cc=alan@lxorguk.ukuu.org.uk \
--cc=grant_lkml@dodo.com.au \
--cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
--cc=nickpiggin@yahoo.com.au \
/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