From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965076AbXBUDn5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:43:57 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S1030223AbXBUDn5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:43:57 -0500 Received: from shawidc-mo1.cg.shawcable.net ([24.71.223.10]:62631 "EHLO pd2mo2so.prod.shaw.ca" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965076AbXBUDn4 (ORCPT ); Tue, 20 Feb 2007 22:43:56 -0500 Date: Tue, 20 Feb 2007 21:43:36 -0600 From: Robert Hancock Subject: Re: High CPU usage with sata_nv In-reply-to: To: Matthew Fredrickson , linux-kernel Cc: Tejun Heo Message-id: <45DBBFE8.5080901@shaw.ca> MIME-version: 1.0 Content-type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-transfer-encoding: 7bit References: User-Agent: Thunderbird 1.5.0.9 (Windows/20061207) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Matthew Fredrickson wrote: > I have noticed something that might be related as well. I am working on > a device driver that would have periodic data errors due to > exceptionally long interrupt handling latency. I have come to the point > that I suspect that it's the sata_nv driver, and now that we can't do > the hdparm -u1 option for sata, it seems to be a bigger problem. What kernel are you using? There were some complaints about latency problems (the ATA status register read taking a ridiculous amount of time to complete) on sata_nv previously, but 2.6.20 should eliminate that problem at least on nForce4 chipsets.. -- Robert Hancock Saskatoon, SK, Canada To email, remove "nospam" from hancockr@nospamshaw.ca Home Page: http://www.roberthancock.com/