"T. Tofus von Blisstein" <[email protected]> writes:
> I have noticed that writing to a usb drive is "slow". One likely culprit is your system's BIOS, that likely reports only USB 1.something capabilities, confident that no operating system would ever believe what it says on the matter anyway. Anecdotal evidence suggests that OpenBSD is one rare bird that actually cares, and respects the device's reported capabilites. Imagine what would happen to your data if we wrote it too fast for the receiving device to actually handle. Take a peek at your dmesg for anything usb related. My dear old Thinkpad R60 apparently had five USB devices available, with only one reported as 2.0 capable (never found out which one that was or if it was indeed accessible): ~$ grep usb dmesg.thingy.mp usb0 at uhci0: USB revision 1.0 uhub0 at usb0 usb1 at uhci1: USB revision 1.0 uhub1 at usb1 usb2 at uhci2: USB revision 1.0 uhub2 at usb2 usb3 at uhci3: USB revision 1.0 uhub3 at usb3 usb4 at ehci0: USB revision 2.0 uhub4 at usb4 while my slightly newer ThinkPad SL500 apparently has a few more (still only one reported as 2.0 capable, though): $ dmesg | grep usb usb1 at ehci1: USB revision 2.0 uhub1 at usb1 "Intel EHCI root hub" rev 2.00/1.00 addr 1 usb2 at uhci0: USB revision 1.0 uhub2 at usb2 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb3 at uhci1: USB revision 1.0 uhub3 at usb3 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb4 at uhci2: USB revision 1.0 uhub4 at usb4 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb5 at uhci3: USB revision 1.0 uhub5 at usb5 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb6 at uhci4: USB revision 1.0 uhub6 at usb6 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb7 at uhci5: USB revision 1.0 uhub7 at usb7 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb0 at ehci0: USB revision 2.0 uhub0 at usb0 "Intel EHCI root hub" rev 2.00/1.00 addr 1 usb1 at ehci1: USB revision 2.0 uhub1 at usb1 "Intel EHCI root hub" rev 2.00/1.00 addr 1 usb2 at uhci0: USB revision 1.0 uhub2 at usb2 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb3 at uhci1: USB revision 1.0 uhub3 at usb3 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb4 at uhci2: USB revision 1.0 uhub4 at usb4 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb5 at uhci3: USB revision 1.0 uhub5 at usb5 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb6 at uhci4: USB revision 1.0 uhub6 at usb6 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb7 at uhci5: USB revision 1.0 uhub7 at usb7 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb0 at ehci0: USB revision 2.0 uhub0 at usb0 "Intel EHCI root hub" rev 2.00/1.00 addr 1 usb1 at ehci1: USB revision 2.0 uhub1 at usb1 "Intel EHCI root hub" rev 2.00/1.00 addr 1 usb2 at uhci0: USB revision 1.0 uhub2 at usb2 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb3 at uhci1: USB revision 1.0 uhub3 at usb3 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb4 at uhci2: USB revision 1.0 uhub4 at usb4 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb5 at uhci3: USB revision 1.0 uhub5 at usb5 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb6 at uhci4: USB revision 1.0 uhub6 at usb6 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 usb7 at uhci5: USB revision 1.0 uhub7 at usb7 "Intel UHCI root hub" rev 1.00/1.00 addr 1 but performance with such things as a USB 3G modem (Huawei somethingorother) and a thumbdrive appears to be better on the newer system. Likely by sheer luck I've happened on the parts that operate on full 2.0 speed. I'm sure people with more wisdom on the subject can fill in on this via the list. - Peter -- Peter N. M. Hansteen, member of the first RFC 1149 implementation team http://bsdly.blogspot.com/ http://www.bsdly.net/ http://www.nuug.no/ "Remember to set the evil bit on all malicious network traffic" delilah spamd[29949]: 85.152.224.147: disconnected after 42673 seconds.
