Re: [OFFTOPIC] Re: IDE-DMA strangeness (another one)

Andre M. Hedrick (
Thu, 3 Dec 1998 12:12:42 -0600 (CST)

On Thu, 3 Dec 1998, Alex A.M.R. Slingerland wrote:

> Hmm. Assuming those are hdparm numbers and not e.g. bonnie:


> Does this mean I'm using (roughly, at least, on
> average) 11.19/16.66 ~= 2/3 of the CPU's processing
> power PIO-ing things off the drive (in e.g. a long
> running "just read and do nothing with the read data"
> test)? If true, the above suggests that neither the
> CPU nor the 16.66 Mb/s interface is a bottleneck (in
> the hdparm test), as this leaves about 1/3 of the CPU
> power for linux'
> housekeeping/context-switching/whatnot and hdparm,
> which I'm guessing would do. Or could I still expect a
> (significant) increase in
> _hdparm_measured_throughput_ when using UDMA/DMA
> (i.e., ignoring the effect the lower CPU load
> would/might have on a real app)?
> Regs,
> Alex.
> PS. Andre: Please consider the pain and suffering you
> are causing by mentioning that ide-update-13 is

I am playing catch up...........with ide-update-16 to be against
2.1.131..........I am looking into a claimed ide-proc security issue
and module fix that "!@#$%^&*()" sector miscount
error with drives bigger than 8.4G with a RawCHS 16383,16,63 and
(id->lba_capacity >= 16514064)

This problem has bitten hard...........

Until this is really settled......I am unsure of more public patch testing
without MAJOR disclaimers...............

> expected "soon", and it still not appearing on your
> site days later ;)
> --

Andre Hedrick
The IDE-FNG for Linux
The APC UPS Specialist for Linux

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to
Please read the FAQ at