On Fri, Jun 20, 2003 at 09:47:48AM -0400, Alan Stern wrote:
That's a definite weakness of the old scheme and part of the reason it was
changed for 2.5. In the meantime, you can try doing this. After you've
switched the drives, do echo scsi remove-single-device 0 1 2 3
/proc/scsi/scsi with
Hi
Unfortunaltely, I had a couple of problems with ehci on usb-storage since
my last report. I've applied ehci-hcd micro-patch from David. I use
2.4.21-rc8-ac1 (basicaly equivalent to 2.4.21-ac1 + ehci-hcd micro patch USB
wise).
Also there was a patch from David with the subject line:
[patch
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Vedran Rodic wrote:
Hi
Unfortunaltely, I had a couple of problems with ehci on usb-storage since
my last report. I've applied ehci-hcd micro-patch from David. I use
2.4.21-rc8-ac1 (basicaly equivalent to 2.4.21-ac1 + ehci-hcd micro patch USB
wise).
Also there was
On Thu, 19 Jun 2003, Major A wrote:
About possible performance improvement on 2.5 ehci/usb-storage:
I've tested with 2.5.71, and I don't see a significant improvement over 2.4.
(Both are arround 7.7 MB/s for read, 10 MB/s for write). Disk can do arround
40 MB/s reads on IDE.
I
Vedran Rodic wrote:
Hi
Unfortunaltely, I had a couple of problems with ehci on usb-storage since
my last report. I've applied ehci-hcd micro-patch from David. I use
2.4.21-rc8-ac1 (basicaly equivalent to 2.4.21-ac1 + ehci-hcd micro patch USB
wise).
2.4.21-ac1 + micro-patch is currently your
the USB-IDE bridge was at least part of the bottleneck here. Writes
are less problematic -- you just dump the data in bulk OUT packets and
the bridge writes to IDE whatever it can whenever it can.
At high speed there's a PING protocol too ... basically the
device can let the host know when a
---BeginMessage---
On Thu, Jun 19, 2003 at 05:10:21PM +0100, Major A wrote:
What's the host controller you're using? I used to see the same
problem here, but it went away altogether with a couple of patches
(which you seem to have applied) and a different EHCI controller.
VT6202, seems to
