lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2006]   [Apr]   [8]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: 40% IDE performance regression going from FC3 to FC5 with same kernel
    On 4/8/06, Alessandro Suardi <alessandro.suardi@gmail.com> wrote:
    > I'll be filing a FC5 performance bug for this but would like an opinion
    > from the IDE kernel people just in case this has already been seen...
    >
    > I just upgraded my home K7-800, 512MB RAM box from FC3 to FC5
    > and noticed a disk performance slowdown while copying files around.
    >
    > System has two 160GB disks, a Samsung SP1604N 2MB cache and
    > a Maxtor 6Y160P0 8MB cache; both disks appear to be almost 2x
    > slower both on hdparm -t tests (17-19MB/s against 33/35 MB/s) and
    > on dd tests, like this:
    >
    > FC3
    > [root@donkey tmp]# time dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/null skip=200 bs=1024k count=200
    > 200+0 records in
    > 200+0 records out
    >
    > real 0m4.623s
    > user 0m0.004s
    > sys 0m1.308s
    >
    > FC5
    > [root@donkey tmp]# time dd if=/dev/hda of=/dev/null skip=200 bs=1024k count=200
    > 200+0 records in
    > 200+0 records out
    > 209715200 bytes (210 MB) copied, 9.67808 seconds, 21.7 MB/s
    >
    > real 0m9.683s
    > user 0m0.008s
    > sys 0m1.400s
    >
    >
    > The initial tests were my last FC3 self-compiled kernel (2.6.16-rc5-git8)
    > vs FC5's 2.6.16-1.2080_FC5 kernel; so just to be sure, I copied over
    > from my FC3 partition the 2.6.16-rc5-git8 kernel and its config file,
    > and rebuilt it under FC5, with just a few differences for the new USB
    > 2.0 disk I added to a PCI controller I just put in, namely
    >
    > [root@donkey linux-2.6.16-rc5-git8]# diff .config
    > /fc3/usr/src/linux-2.6.16-rc5-git8/.config
    > 4c4
    > < # Fri Apr 7 03:58:23 2006
    > ---
    > > # Mon Mar 6 22:49:32 2006
    > 1110,1112c1110
    > < CONFIG_USB_EHCI_HCD=m
    > < CONFIG_USB_EHCI_SPLIT_ISO=y
    > < CONFIG_USB_EHCI_ROOT_HUB_TT=y
    > ---
    > > # CONFIG_USB_EHCI_HCD is not set
    > 1115c1113
    > < CONFIG_USB_UHCI_HCD=m
    > ---
    > > CONFIG_USB_UHCI_HCD=y
    > 1218d1215
    > < # CONFIG_USB_SISUSBVGA is not set
    >
    > The result is unexpected - performance delta is still there. Concatenating
    > output from hdparm -i /dev/hda and hdparm /dev/hda for the same kernel
    > under FC3 and FC5, the only difference is
    >
    > [root@donkey ~]# diff /tmp/hdparm.out.2616rc2git8-fc5
    > /tmp/hdparm.out.2616rc2git8
    > 14c14
    > < Drive conforms to: (null): ATA/ATAPI-1 ATA/ATAPI-2 ATA/ATAPI-3
    > ATA/ATAPI-4 ATA/ATAPI-5 ATA/ATAPI-6 ATA/ATAPI-7
    > ---
    > > Drive conforms to: (null):
    > 27c27
    > < geometry = 19457/255/63, sectors = 312581808, start = 0
    > ---
    > > geometry = 19457/255/63, sectors = 160041885696, start = 0
    >
    > I'll try now and rebuild a 2.6.16-rc5-git8 kernel under FC5 with the
    > FC3 GCC and see whether that is responsible for the performance
    > drop... of course if anyone has any idea about what's going on, I
    > will be happy to try out stuff. Attaching hdparm output from the FC5
    > 2.6.16-rc5-git8 just to show that there is DMA etc. all configured fine.

    Just for the record - no, even rebuilding same kernel with same GCC
    (3.4.4) under FC5, disk performance is much slower than FC3 -
    according to hdparm _and_ dd tests.

    --alessandro

    "Dreamer ? Each one of us is a dreamer. We just push it down deep because
    we are repeatedly told that we are not allowed to dream in real life"
    (Reinhold Ziegler)
    -
    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: 2006-04-08 17:41    [W:0.040 / U:60.320 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site