From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Soeren Sonnenburg Subject: Re: [PATCH] AHCI PCI ID for MacBook Pro Date: Sat, 10 Feb 2007 17:03:37 +0100 Message-ID: <1171123417.31813.4.camel@localhost> References: <82530.66623.qm@web25412.mail.ukl.yahoo.com> <45CC3FE5.2010408@gmail.com> <1171035949.23440.4.camel@localhost> <200702091841.45125.rootkit85@yahoo.it> <1171102758.19041.5.camel@localhost> <45CDC5DF.9060306@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: Received: from nn7.de ([85.214.94.156]:34836 "EHLO nn7.de" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S932695AbXBJQDk (ORCPT ); Sat, 10 Feb 2007 11:03:40 -0500 In-Reply-To: <45CDC5DF.9060306@gmail.com> Sender: linux-ide-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-ide@vger.kernel.org To: Tejun Heo Cc: Matteo Croce , linux-ide@vger.kernel.org On Sat, 2007-02-10 at 08:17 -0500, Tejun Heo wrote: > Soeren Sonnenburg wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 18:41 +0100, Matteo Croce wrote: > >> On Friday 09 February 2007 16:45:49 you wrote: > >>> On Fri, 2007-02-09 at 04:33 -0500, Tejun Heo wrote: > >>>> Root Kit wrote: > >>> [...] > >>> Hmmhh I cannot really reproduce this benchmark. Matteo, with which > >>> benchmarking program did you produce this ? > >>> [...] > >> bonnie++ from ubuntu repos > > > > OK, I reran bonnie++ -d /tmp/ on a unencrypted partition - results are > > here http://nn7.de/bench/ahci.html . Looks like it is slightly faster > > for sequential block write (2MB/s faster) and sequential read using > > putc() (1MB/s faster), though putc() is slowed down by 6MB/s. > > I suspect the difference is caused by either the io scheduler in use or > disk drive itself. well I am doing both benchmarks on a macbookpro1,1 -> 32bit mode (matteo does it on a macbook pro2, sth so he has a c2d and does it in 64bit -> amd64 mode). So the io scheduler is the same or do you mean inside of ahci/piix ? > > However what may make it worth is that I don't see any errors on > > suspend/resume anymore... > > Hmm... So, ata_piix fails to suspend/resume properly on your machine? > It should work. Can you describe how it fails? Well I keep seeing this: ata3.01: revalidation failed (errno=-2) ata3: failed to recover some devices, retrying in 5 secs ATA: abnormal status 0x7F on port 0x40DF ATA: abnormal status 0x7F on port 0x40DF ata3.01: configured for UDMA/133 but I am still on 2.6.20-rc6 ... so sorry if this is now fixed in .20. Soeren. -- Sometimes, there's a moment as you're waking, when you become aware of the real world around you, but you're still dreaming.