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

Re: [debian-knoppix] PB cdrecord on SMP+2.4.22-xfs



On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 08:48:10PM +0200, Baeckeroot alain wrote:
> Le Mardi 23 Septembre 2003 22:32, Baeckeroot alain a écrit :
> > Hello knoppix world :)
> > 
> > I'm testing the new knoppix-2003-09-05  aka pre-3.3 with 2.4.22-xfs kernel
> > I did an hard disk installation :)
> > I have some troubles when burning CD on my SMP machine
> >  (Abit BP6 dual celeron + 512 MB RAM)
> > 
> > The load is growing up to 3.0 or 4.0 and I have hundreds of 'empty buffer' 
> > and 'empty fifo'  whereas with the 2.4.21-xfs kernel the load stays very low
> > (more or less 0.1) and 'min fifo = 93%'  'min buffer = 90 %'
> > 
> > I is it an SMP bug ? 
> > What can i do to invetigate more ?
> > 
> > Alain
> > 
> I've done a new test, while burning knoppix-3.3-2003-09-24:
> root@servical:/home/al2/download/Knoppix# cat /proc/version
> Linux version 2.4.22-xfs (root@Knoppix) (gcc version 2.95.4 20011002 (Debian prerelease)) #1 SMP Fri Sep 5 23:47:38 CEST 2003
> root@servical:/home/al2/download/Knoppix# cdrecord -version
> Cdrecord 2.01a16 (i686-pc-linux-gnu) Copyright (C) 1995-2003 Jörg Schilling
> 
> As root:
> cdrecord -v dev=0,1,0 knoppix-3.3-2003-09-24.iso
> ....
> Average write speed  24.6x.
> Min drive buffer fill was 0%
> Total of 73 possible drive buffer underruns predicted.
> Fixating...
> Fixating time:   17.289s
> cdrecord.mmap: fifo had 11559 puts and 11559 gets.
> cdrecord.mmap: fifo was 0 times empty and 5292 times full, min fill was 93%.
> 
> With the 2.4.20 kernel buffer never goes under 90% !!!

What is the problem? Min buffer fill was 93%, see above. "drive buffer
fill", possibly a new debugging variable of cdrecord alpha 18, is
something entirely different, I guess. 

Did you enable DMA, btw? ("knoppix dma")

> How can I dump the CD image to a new iso, to compare the md5sum ?

cp /dev/cdrom1 new.iso (Really!)
But make sure the images have the same size and the second one is not
padded with zeros. In this case, you have to truncate the image to be
the same length as the original one.

Regards
-Klaus Knopper
_______________________________________________
debian-knoppix mailing list
debian-knoppix@linuxtag.org
http://mailman.linuxtag.org/mailman/listinfo/debian-knoppix


Reply to: