Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262253AbUDDICY (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Apr 2004 04:02:24 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S262256AbUDDICX (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Apr 2004 04:02:23 -0400 Received: from webmail.sub.ru ([213.247.139.22]:22021 "HELO techno.sub.ru") by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S262253AbUDDICU (ORCPT ); Sun, 4 Apr 2004 04:02:20 -0400 Subject: Re: 2.6.4 : 100% CPU use on EIDE disk operarion, VIA chipset From: Mikhail Ramendik To: Andreas Hartmann Cc: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org In-Reply-To: <406E9EE5.7030509@A88a2.a.pppool.de> References: <406E9EE5.7030509@A88a2.a.pppool.de> Content-Type: text/plain Message-Id: <1081065734.1073.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> Mime-Version: 1.0 X-Mailer: Ximian Evolution 1.4.5 (1.4.5-6aspMR) Date: Sun, 04 Apr 2004 12:02:14 +0400 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 888 Lines: 28 Hello, Andreas Hartmann wrote: > > It turned out that on disk-intensive operation, the "system" CPU usage > > skyrockets. With a mere "cp" of a large file to the same direstory > > (tested with ext3fs and FAT32 file systems), it is 100% practically all > > of the time ! > But you're right, 2.6.4 is slower than 2.4.25. See the thread "Very poor > performance with 2.6.4" here in the list. As recommended there, I have tried 2.6.5-rc3-mm4. No change. Still 100% CPU usage; the performance seems teh same. Yours, Mikhail Ramendik P.S. Sorry for making all comments into answers to your letter. I just don't want to break the thread. - 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/