From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S1751002AbWHTR2a (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Aug 2006 13:28:30 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1751004AbWHTR2a (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Aug 2006 13:28:30 -0400 Received: from wx-out-0506.google.com ([66.249.82.238]:8363 "EHLO wx-out-0506.google.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750882AbWHTR23 (ORCPT ); Sun, 20 Aug 2006 13:28:29 -0400 DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=beta; d=gmail.com; h=received:message-id:date:from:user-agent:mime-version:to:cc:subject:references:in-reply-to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; b=uQfBLCcjehMZKQDmR0DdDTPB75Faii3MCI0/Sg/Xn6BQwwncFSNiMMyeud1tvFjB0XbxqiIzimgVnzVDe4J0KzVqnEs+T0ApWNFWfogi+cco8r9H5SdiFsfUWBdHWOUfpHMRqhZQGk+PVc8JDhsLuQQPTyB5eCrgzv82x760g2A= Message-ID: <44E89BBA.9090809@gmail.com> Date: Sun, 20 Aug 2006 13:28:26 -0400 From: Ryan Newberry User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.5 (X11/20060731) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Jan Engelhardt CC: Mike Galbraith , Ingo Molnar , Martin Bligh , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Andrew Morton Subject: Re: [Bugme-new] [Bug 7027] New: CD Ripping speeds slow with 2.6.17 References: <200608191800.k7JI0ML0015395@fire-2.osdl.org> <20060819111437.a88f71cd.akpm@osdl.org> <1156062478.6690.65.camel@Homer.simpson.net> <1156068220.6034.1.camel@Homer.simpson.net> <1156072300.5052.7.camel@Homer.simpson.net> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Jan Engelhardt wrote: >>>> I'm skeptical. Is the source for this application available? I'd like >>>> to see this problem. >>>> >>> (never mind. saw your other post, found source) >>> >> Hm. I can't get better than 1.4x rip speed out of it with a stock SuSE >> 10.1 kernel (2.6.16). It's also using truckloads of cpu, whereas the CD >> rippers that came with this distro use a percent or two. >> > > What command did you use to rip? > > > > Jan Engelhardt > The ripper he's using is ripoff I assume (source code here: http://prdownloads.sourceforge.net/ripoffc/ripoff-0.8.tar.gz?download extraction functionality contained in src/RipOffExtractor.c) . It uses libparanoia to do its job, like the cdparanoia command. On my system, ripoff has high CPU usage with a 2.6.16 kernel as well, but it reports a 9.0x rate on average. Could the fact that it has such high CPU usage be a possible reason I am experiencing a slower ripping speed (1.2x) when the patch that was git bisected is applied? -- Ryan Newberry http://ripoffc.sourceforge.net "All mankind is divided into three classes: those that are immovable, those that are movable, and those that move." - Benjamin Franklin