From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S262048AbTL3ASC (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Dec 2003 19:18:02 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id S263800AbTL3ASB (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Dec 2003 19:18:01 -0500 Received: from [24.35.117.106] ([24.35.117.106]:32650 "EHLO localhost.localdomain") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S262048AbTL3ASA (ORCPT ); Mon, 29 Dec 2003 19:18:00 -0500 Date: Mon, 29 Dec 2003 19:17:23 -0500 (EST) From: Thomas Molina X-X-Sender: tmolina@localhost.localdomain To: Martin Schlemmer cc: Linus Torvalds , Kernel Mailing List Subject: Re: 2.6.0 performance problems In-Reply-To: <1072741422.25741.67.camel@nosferatu.lan> Message-ID: References: <1072741422.25741.67.camel@nosferatu.lan> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, 30 Dec 2003, Martin Schlemmer wrote: > > UDMA modes: udma0 udma1 *udma2 udma3 udma4 > > AdvancedPM=yes: mode=0x80 (128) WriteCache=enabled > > Drive conforms to: ATA/ATAPI-5 T13 1321D revision 1: > > > > * signifies the current active mode > > Any reason it is currently set to udma2 where it support udma4 ? Not really. The question was what mode the disk was running in. This is what it defaults to. This is a laptop drive that only runs at 5400RPM. Would changing the mode to udma4 make a dramatic difference?