usb mass storage bug

usb mass storage bug

[Joe Sevy]

Sorry, no logs or dmesg to report; just performance.
Using kernel 2.6.12: USB flash drive (san-disk cruzer
micro) Copy FROM drive is normal and quick; copy TO
drive is amazingly slow. (30 minutes for 50K file).
Used same configuration as for 2.6.11.11. Cured by
going back to old kernel.

Sorry I can't give better report.

Thank you.

Joe Sevy

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Tired of spam?  Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around 
http://mail.yahoo.com 

Re: usb mass storage bug

[Greg KH]

On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 01:30:47PM -0700, Joe Sevy wrote:
> Sorry, no logs or dmesg to report; just performance.
> Using kernel 2.6.12: USB flash drive (san-disk cruzer
> micro) Copy FROM drive is normal and quick; copy TO
> drive is amazingly slow. (30 minutes for 50K file).
> Used same configuration as for 2.6.11.11. Cured by
> going back to old kernel.

Are you using CONFIG_UB or CONFIG_USB_STORAGE?

Also, linux-usb-devel is the better place for this if you have a more
detailed report.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: usb mass storage bug

[Pete Zaitcev]

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:09:58 -0700, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 01:30:47PM -0700, Joe Sevy wrote:
> > Sorry, no logs or dmesg to report; just performance.
> > Using kernel 2.6.12: USB flash drive (san-disk cruzer
> > micro) Copy FROM drive is normal and quick; copy TO
> > drive is amazingly slow. (30 minutes for 50K file).
> > Used same configuration as for 2.6.11.11. Cured by
> > going back to old kernel.
> 
> Are you using CONFIG_UB or CONFIG_USB_STORAGE?

Please, Greg. I knew that someone will try to implicate ub here, but you?
Consider two things:
 #1 Joe's kernel reads and writes and sharply different speeds,
    while ub is uniformly slow
 #2 It's a regression in 2.6.12

-- Pete

Re: usb mass storage bug

[Greg KH]

On Tue, Jul 12, 2005 at 10:50:13PM -0700, Pete Zaitcev wrote:
> On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:09:58 -0700, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, Jul 11, 2005 at 01:30:47PM -0700, Joe Sevy wrote:
> > > Sorry, no logs or dmesg to report; just performance.
> > > Using kernel 2.6.12: USB flash drive (san-disk cruzer
> > > micro) Copy FROM drive is normal and quick; copy TO
> > > drive is amazingly slow. (30 minutes for 50K file).
> > > Used same configuration as for 2.6.11.11. Cured by
> > > going back to old kernel.
> > 
> > Are you using CONFIG_UB or CONFIG_USB_STORAGE?
> 
> Please, Greg. I knew that someone will try to implicate ub here, but you?

Heh, sorry, I didn't really pay attention for the time ammounts, only
that he reported things slower.

You are right, ub isn't _that_ slow at all, I use it all the time on
some of my devices just fine.

thanks,

greg k-h

Re: usb mass storage bug

[Alberto Santini]

can you tell if it is ehci, ohci or uhci?







[Alberto Santini][alberto@lagnusi.net][http://laGNUsi.net/]
[Actually the only one TECO developer, i believe:]
[Want to help me? Mail me!]

Re: usb mass storage bug

[Pete Zaitcev]

On Wed, 13 Jul 2005 13:53:16 -0700, Greg KH <greg@kroah.com> wrote:

> You are right, ub isn't _that_ slow at all, I use it all the time on
> some of my devices just fine.

Ub actually gets terribly slow when partition size is odd (for both
reading and writing). I even have a patch for it, but it's yucky.
Here's the original discussion:
 http://groups-beta.google.com/group/linux.kernel/browse_frm/thread/f11b7721d7ed6d1f&hl=en

-- Pete

Re: usb mass storage bug

[Pete Zaitcev]

On Mon, 11 Jul 2005 13:30:47 -0700 (PDT), Joe Sevy <jmsevy@yahoo.com> wrote:

> Sorry, no logs or dmesg to report; just performance.
> Using kernel 2.6.12: USB flash drive (san-disk cruzer
> micro) Copy FROM drive is normal and quick; copy TO
> drive is amazingly slow. (30 minutes for 50K file).
> Used same configuration as for 2.6.11.11. Cured by
> going back to old kernel.

Symptoms seem similar to this:
 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=159269

Try 2.6.13-rc2, it would be a valuable data point.

-- Pete