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

Bug#375742: marked as done (linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp: sync speed of RAID devices is 2000K/sec by default, because don't honor speed_limit_max)

Your message dated Tue, 8 Sep 2009 22:03:05 +0200
with message-id <20090908200305.GG19152@inutil.org>
and subject line Re: linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp: sync speed of RAID devices is 2000K/sec by default, because don't honor speed_limit_max
has caused the Debian Bug report #375742,
regarding linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp: sync speed of RAID devices is 2000K/sec by default, because don't honor speed_limit_max
to be marked as done.

This means that you claim that the problem has been dealt with.
If this is not the case it is now your responsibility to reopen the
Bug report if necessary, and/or fix the problem forthwith.

(NB: If you are a system administrator and have no idea what this
message is talking about, this may indicate a serious mail system
misconfiguration somewhere. Please contact owner@bugs.debian.org
immediately.)


-- 
375742: http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=375742
Debian Bug Tracking System
Contact owner@bugs.debian.org with problems
--- Begin Message --- 
Package: linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp
Version: 2.6.16-11bpo1
Severity: normal

The sync speed of RAID devices is only 2000K/sec by default.  It's
because the raid driver don't honor
/proc/sys/dec/raid/speed_limit_max and is using speed_limit_min as
the max.

speed_limit_min is 1000 by default, if I increase the number for 5000,
the sync speed of the RAID increases to 5000K/sec.  If I increase to a
bigger number the sync speed of the raid maxes on hardware capability.

I believe in the kernel 2.6.16 the RAID driver use speed_limit_min as
the max, and ignores speed_limit_max.  On kernel 2.6.8 the behaviour
seems to be correct, the RAID driver honors speed_limit_max.

    Jose Calhariz

-- System Information:
Debian Release: 3.1
Architecture: i386 (i686)
Kernel: Linux 2.6.16-1-686-smp
Locale: LANG=C, LC_CTYPE=pt_PT@euro (charmap=ISO-8859-15)

Versions of packages linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp depends on:
ii  initramfs-tools [linux-initr 0.59bpo1    tools for generating an initramfs
ii  module-init-tools            3.2.2-1bpo1 tools for managing Linux kernel mo

-- debconf information:
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/postinst/kimage-is-a-directory:
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/prerm/would-invalidate-boot-loader-2.6.16-1-686-smp: true
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/postinst/old-system-map-link-2.6.16-1-686-smp: true
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/preinst/already-running-this-2.6.16-1-686-smp:
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/preinst/bootloader-initrd-2.6.16-1-686-smp: true
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/preinst/failed-to-move-modules-2.6.16-1-686-smp:
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/postinst/depmod-error-initrd-2.6.16-1-686-smp: false
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/preinst/overwriting-modules-2.6.16-1-686-smp: true
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/postinst/old-dir-initrd-link-2.6.16-1-686-smp: true
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/postinst/depmod-error-2.6.16-1-686-smp: false
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/preinst/abort-install-2.6.16-1-686-smp:
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/postinst/create-kimage-link-2.6.16-1-686-smp: true
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/postinst/old-initrd-link-2.6.16-1-686-smp: true
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/preinst/lilo-initrd-2.6.16-1-686-smp: true
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/preinst/elilo-initrd-2.6.16-1-686-smp: true
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/preinst/initrd-2.6.16-1-686-smp:
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/preinst/lilo-has-ramdisk:
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/postinst/bootloader-test-error-2.6.16-1-686-smp:
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/postinst/bootloader-error-2.6.16-1-686-smp:
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/preinst/abort-overwrite-2.6.16-1-686-smp:
  linux-image-2.6.16-1-686-smp/prerm/removing-running-kernel-2.6.16-1-686-smp: true

--- End Message ---
--- Begin Message --- 
Version: 2.6.30-1

On Tue, Aug 11, 2009 at 12:59:35PM +0100, Jose Calhariz wrote:
> > Have you been able to test it?
> 
> I have not seen the problem with kernels from etch or 2.6.30 from
> backports.org.  Thank you.

Thanks, marking as fixed.

Cheers,
        Moritz

--- End Message ---
Reply to: