From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Return-Path: <linux-kernel-owner+willy=40w.ods.org-S261779AbVGEKCp@vger.kernel.org>
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand
	id S261779AbVGEKCp (ORCPT <rfc822;willy@w.ods.org>);
	Tue, 5 Jul 2005 06:02:45 -0400
Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S261778AbVGEKCp
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel-outgoing>);
	Tue, 5 Jul 2005 06:02:45 -0400
Received: from mailhub3.nextra.sk ([195.168.1.146]:39687 "EHLO
	mailhub3.nextra.sk") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S261779AbVGEKBt
	(ORCPT <rfc822;linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>);
	Tue, 5 Jul 2005 06:01:49 -0400
Message-ID: <42CA5A84.1060005@rainbow-software.org>
Date: Tue, 05 Jul 2005 12:01:40 +0200
From: Ondrej Zary <linux@rainbow-software.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.2 (X11/20050317)
X-Accept-Language: en-us, en
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Andr=E9_Tomt?=" <andre@tomt.net>
CC: Al Boldi <a1426z@gawab.com>,
       "'Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz'" <bzolnier@gmail.com>,
       "'Linus Torvalds'" <torvalds@osdl.org>, linux-ide@vger.kernel.org,
       linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [git patches] IDE update
References: <200507042033.XAA19724@raad.intranet> <42C9C56D.7040701@tomt.net>
In-Reply-To: <42C9C56D.7040701@tomt.net>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org
X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org

André Tomt wrote:
> Al Boldi wrote:
> 
>> Bartlomiej Zolnierkiewicz wrote: {
>>
>>>>> On 7/4/05, Al Boldi <a1426z@gawab.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hdparm -tT gives 38mb/s in 2.4.31
>>>>> Cat /dev/hda > /dev/null gives 2% user 33% sys 65% idle
>>>>>
>>>>> Hdparm -tT gives 28mb/s in 2.6.12
>>>>> Cat /dev/hda > /dev/null gives 2% user 25% sys 0% idle 73% IOWAIT
> 
> 
> The "hdparm doesn't get as high scores as in 2.4" is a old discussed to 
> death "problem" on LKML. So far nobody has been able to show it affects 
> anything  but that pretty useless quasi-benchmark.
> 

No, it's not a problem with hdparm. hdparm only shows that there is 
_really_ a problem:

2.6.12
root@pentium:/home/rainbow# time dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/null bs=512
count=1048576
1048576+0 records in
1048576+0 records out

real    0m32.339s
user    0m1.500s
sys     0m14.560s

2.4.26
root@pentium:/home/rainbow# time dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/null bs=512
count=1048576
1048576+0 records in
1048576+0 records out

real    0m23.858s
user    0m1.750s
sys     0m15.180s

-- 
Ondrej Zary