Re: problem with SATA disk, difference between standard kernel and Debian kernel
On Thu, Dec 11, 2008 at 10:40:50PM +0100, Emanoil Kotsev wrote:
>
> do you have custom kernel or debian stock kernel.
Until today, I was using a standard kernel from kernel.org. Today I
downloaded the package with the Debian kernel sources (2.6.24, blah
etchnhalf or something like that ...), configured it and made a kernel
package with "make-kpkg kernel_image -us -uc", installed the package I
made, and now I'm using that kernel.
I'm not sure if I could use a pre-built Debian kernel: the installer
couldn't access the SATA disks because it didn't have the module for
the controller, and a pre-built standard Debian kernel might not have
that, either.
> What is standard? Please, look that you _don't_ use the ide_generic
> or ata_generic drivers. so kernel config and lsmod check is worth I
> think. This we have discussed in other postings. if compiling your
> own kernel this could be the issue. I would also see what hdparm
> -tT says
I'll attach the .config to this mail. The ide_generic and ata_generic
drivers do not work for this board. For the IDE disk, I'm using
CONFIG_BLK_DEV_JMICRON: JMicron JMB36x support. The help for that says
"Basic support for the JMicron ATA controllers. For full support use
the libata drivers." But libata is deprecated? And I think I tried
that, and it didn't work.
For sata, it's CONFIG_SATA_AHCI ... Hm, I don't know about
CONFIG_ATA_PIIX:
"This option enables support for ICH5/6/7/8 Serial ATA and support for
PATA on the Intel ESB/ICH/PIIX3/PIIX4 series host controllers."
lspci says ICH9: "SATA controller: Intel Corporation 82801IB (ICH9) 4
port SATA AHCI Controller (rev 02)".
Should I try CONFIG_ATA_PIIX instead (dunno if it works)?
# hdparm -tT /dev/sdb
/dev/sdb:
Timing cached reads: 14464 MB in 2.00 seconds = 7241.58 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 202 MB in 3.02 seconds = 66.83 MB/sec
hdpparm -tT /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 14308 MB in 2.00 seconds = 7164.25 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 208 MB in 3.02 seconds = 68.83 MB/sec
That's about the same as what I see in /proc/mdstat during a rebuild:
about 70MB/sec for the partitions at the beginning of the disk, about
65MB/sec for the middle and 40MB/sec for the partition at the
end. These disks are pretty slow. A much older, single SCSI disk is
faster to read than the SATA RAID-1, maybe not in benchmark numbers
but in how long it takes to load something.
> I've been trying raid over usb for the last couple of months and had similar
> problems with sata drives and no such problems with ide in usb boxes.
> Finally no one could explain the reason for the raid loosing the drive and
> I attached them directly to SATA bus. So far it's working.
>
> Hope this information helps
Hmm ... What error messages did you get? When the disks were connected
via USB, wouldn't you get different messages not related to SATA?
--
"Don't let them, daddy. Don't let the stars run down."
http://adin.dyndns.org/adin/TheLastQ.htm
Reply to: