![]() | |||||||||||||
Messages in this thread |
On Sun, Feb 08, 2004 at 11:45:18AM +1100, Athol Mullen wrote: > Before I modified eighty_ninty_three(), it returning 0 caused the _indicated_ > mode to drop to UDMA33. Check in /proc/ide/piix to see what mode the driver > tells you. IIRC (could be wrong), dmesg and hdparm both believe it to be in > UDMA33 while the init code and /proc/ide/piix both showed it as UDMA5. I captured dmesg and /proc/ide/piix, but forgot to post them. They're at work now. But I did the change, by commenting out the call to eighty_ninety_three() in piix.c, and my disks came back to 54 MB/s each, and 64 MB/s cumulated. dmesg showed UDMA33 before and now displays UDMA100 again. But I obviously cannot let it like that because if I install this kernel in a 40-pin machine, I will get some surprizes ! > I'm starting to wonder if my ICH5 _is_ actually running UDMA5... It's doing > 21MB/s, which I've been blaming on the old 30G Quantum, whereas the ICH4 with > a 120G drive is doing 56MB/s... I think I checked the bit flags in > /proc/ide/ide0/config and it showed up as UDMA5. I'm certain that this one changed before and after the patch, but I cannot tell you what the differences were. > >> I'm not certain exactly how this would be implemented, but I'd like to see > >> eighty_ninty_three() check for chipset-specific detection code, and use the > > well, why not in piix:piix_ratemask() around line 315 ? > > I could put it there, but I was actually intending to use it to also return a > value properly for eighty_ninty_three(), and figured that it would need to be > a separate routine - I expect that the module structure needs to change, and > that's where I'm not sure - it could affect _all_ ide drivers. There might > be others that have their own specific detection code, and what I'm looking > to do is establish the framework for that. I understand. But could you please post your ICH5 detection code so that I can try it on this machine. I still can play with it for a few days before it gets racked. And I can try with both 40 and 80-pin cables. > business .sig wasn't supposed to get tacked on after my usenet .sig... It > _was_ a spam-free email address. :-( Now the only thing you can do is to count how many days elapse before you get your first spam... Regards, Willy - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/ | ||||||||||||
| Last update: 2005-03-22 13:00 [from the cache] ©2003-2008 | |||||||||||||