Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 10:17:41 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 10:17:41 -0500 Received: from gen3-newburypark5-192.vnnyca.adelphia.net ([207.175.226.192]:48888 "EHLO dave.home") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sat, 7 Dec 2002 10:17:40 -0500 Date: Sat, 7 Dec 2002 07:25:16 -0800 From: David Ashley Message-Id: <200212071525.gB7FPGn00204@dave.home> To: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: RE: 2.4.18 beats 2.5.50 in hard drive access???? Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 863 Lines: 20 Manish Lachwani (manish@Zambeel.com) wrote: >Can you also make sure that write cache is ON? hdparm -q -W 1 /dev/hdX. And >also the READ cache. hdparm -q -A 1 /dev/hdX. > >Also, from the IDENTIFY information below, it looks like no UDMA mode is set >for the device. It always is set to multiword dma 2. I tried both hdparm commands on hdb/hdc/hdd and they didn't print out any errors, but the performance hasn't changed any. I'm only concerned with scattered read access performance, write performance is fairly irrelevant. Is the lack of a UDMA mode related to the kernel message of "DMA disabled"? Thanks-- Dave - 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/