On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, Jakob �stergaard wrote:
> On Tue, 28 Mar 2000, octave klaba wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > a test between single ide <-> raid-1 soft ide <-> raid-1 soft scsi-2
> >
> > 1� PIII600/128RAM/1XIDE20.5
> > 2� PIII600/128RAM/2XIDE20.5 raid-1 soft
> > 3� PIII500/256/2940U2W/SCSI-2/RAID-1/IBM18Go7200
> >
> > -------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
> > -Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
> > MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU
> > 1� 2000 9212 96.4 20354 13.9 4411 3.6 3822 35.4 22180 8.0 85.6 0.7
> > 2� 2000 1727 22.4 2095 5.5 1381 34.9 3070 98.6 4320 97.8 74.8 7.3
> > 3� 2000 7236 91.6 18321 15.5 8003 13.7 8347 96.7 18289 11.6 107.7 1.82
>
> >From the CPU load on the raid-1 soft IDE test, I think seems likely that you
> didn't have DMA enabled. Could that be possible ?
>
> It doesn't make sense to have 97% CPU load when reading with 4 MB/s unless
> it's done with port I/O.
I am not sure I agreed with that. Here is a test on a 166 MHz Pentium
with a Triton PIIX IDE chipset:
-------Sequential Output-------- ---Sequential Input-- --Random--
-Per Char- --Block--- -Rewrite-- -Per Char- --Block--- --Seeks---
Machine MB K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU K/sec %CPU /sec %CPU
100 1835 98.2 6728 30.2 3301 34.1 1844 94.5 9390 41.8 173.3 5.7
This machine is most certainly not using PIO:
guardian:~# hdparm -v /dev/hda /dev/hdc
/dev/hda:
multcount = 0 (off)
I/O support = 0 (default 16-bit)
unmaskirq = 0 (off)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 0 (off)
nowerr = 0 (off)
readonly = 0 (off)
readahead = 8 (on)
geometry = 3739/255/63, sectors = 60074784, start = 0
/dev/hdc:
multcount = 0 (off)
I/O support = 0 (default 16-bit)
unmaskirq = 0 (off)
using_dma = 1 (on)
keepsettings = 0 (off)
nowerr = 0 (off)
readonly = 0 (off)
readahead = 8 (on)
geometry = 3739/255/63, sectors = 60074784, start = 0
-- Mike
