Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S264174AbUD0Peg (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2004 11:34:36 -0400 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S264175AbUD0Peg (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2004 11:34:36 -0400 Received: from kinesis.swishmail.com ([209.10.110.86]:33033 "EHLO kinesis.swishmail.com") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S264174AbUD0Pef (ORCPT ); Tue, 27 Apr 2004 11:34:35 -0400 Message-ID: <408E7E79.9080405@techsource.com> Date: Tue, 27 Apr 2004 11:38:33 -0400 From: Timothy Miller MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Ken Moffat CC: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: IDE throughput in 2.6 - it's good! References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 863 Lines: 23 Ken Moffat wrote: > > So, despite the numbers shown by hdparm looking worse, when only one > user is doing anything the performance is actually improved. I've no > idea which changes have achieved this, but thanks to whoever were > involved. I've done tests using dd to and from the raw block device under 2.4 and 2.6. Memory size (kernel boot param mem=) doesn't seem to affect performance, so I assume that means that dd to and from the raw block device is unbuffered. When I compare read and write speeds between 2.4 and 2.6, 2.6 is definately slower. The last 2.6 kernel I tried this with is 2.6.5. - 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/