[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Help with hdparm



On 27.08.2002 18:53:14 bob wrote:

> MKolb@haitec.de <MKolb@haitec.de> [2002-08-27 15:24:36 +0200]:
> > On 27.08.2002 14:35:38 chainy wrote:
> >
> > > On Tuesday 27 August 2002 09:49, Bob Proulx wrote:
> > [...]
> > > >  Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  1.96 seconds = 32.65 
MB/sec
> >
> > I ask, too ! ;o)
> > I have a SD-11 with a Maxtor 40 GB HD, too.
> > The newest BIOS for this board.
> > Never got more than between 10 and 12 MB/s at buffered disk reads.
> 
> I imagine that many things could affect the transfer speed.  One is
> that I have a slightly faster CPU (classic slot-A 950MHz with 512kb
> cache) versus the 500MHz previously posted.  I have 512MB of CL2 PC133
> memory installed.  Note that this motherboard can use PC133 but only
> runs at PC100 speeds IIRC.  Also, I expect that different disk drive
> controllers will perform differently.  This is an older SD11
> motherboard but I have updated IIRC to 611(?) BIOS some time ago.
> 
> I believe the biggest lever is the newer drivers with the 2.4 kernel.
> What kernel are you running?  If you are still running something older
> then I would advise updating to 2.4.18 which has been a good version.

Did you really read my posting?
The important thing, you cut, was:

Although I am using the 80 wires I can not use UDMA. Only Multiword-DMA 2.
Every faster option results in DMA errors and after a short period the 
kernel hangs.
Have no idea where the problem is. My UDMA cable is out of a COMPAQ 
Business PC.
So this cable should not be source of the problem. It is short and the 
quality seems to be good.

So the problem is simple Chipset/IDE-Bus/kernel. I can not switch on UDMA 
without hanging up my computer. With   Multiword-DMA I can not get faster 
transferrates. That's not because of CPU or memory. 
I tried nearly every kernel with DMA-Support. Started with 2.5.x and went 
back to 2.0.x.

What North/South-Bridge-combination you have on this board?
Might it be that there are different versions out there?



Reply to: