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

Re: Pioneer DVR-106D issues



>> Volker, are you using ide-scsi or ide-cd?

>I always use ide-scsi with burners and so far never had trouble with it.
>It's also required for Andy's random write patch.

>Btw you can change that at run-time by reloading modules ide-cd and
>ide-scsi (need to rmmod some other modules first). Both grab all
>available devices when loaded, unless you use ignore=hdb,hdd etc on the
>first one.

Well, ide-scsi did burn at 4x, but I was having kernel oops, so I was avoided 
it.  That's why I wanted to find out someone else's experience with ide-cd, 
since that was at least working fine.  But, at least it's good to know that 
ide-scsi + Pioneer A06 isn't the actual problem.  Probably my chipset. :(

>> I'm actually beginning to wonder if the issue is partially my ide cable 
>> itself.

>Oh wow, they cost 4EUR here (proper high-density ones), at the first
>hint of trouble the scissors go through the old one ;))) They are
>actually more fragile than one generally assumes, especially as one is
>forced to pull them off at the cable instead of at the connector.

I switched out the cable.  It had no effect.

Now, I finally got around to testing 2.6.0-test11 (and now 2.6.0, since it was 
just released).  Good news.  ide-cd simu-burns at a steady 4x and has the 
same CPU usage behavior as ide-scsi did with dma enabled.  So, my solution I 
guess is to just use the 2.6.x kernel line.  I'm still not fully convinced 
that it was simply an issue of dma not being enabled as with dma disabled 
with ide-scsi, I was able to burn at around 2x.

Oh, and a check with readcd on a 4x dvd-r shows a read rate of 8MB/s around 
the end of the CD (I only ran 3 meshpoints against the last 58128 sectors of 
a 2258128 burned dvd-r, but I think that it's a mostly sufficient test).  CPU 
usage is near nil during the whole read, system is responsive, yada yada.  
So, all signs indicate that it was some non-specific ide issue that ide-scsi 
managed to circumvent in 2.4.x for the most part.

So, I'd said this thread is done.



Reply to: