Re: [Problem] slow write to dvd-ram since 2.6.7-bk8

[Droebbel]

On Fr, 2005-02-18 at 00:10 +0100, Tino Keitel wrote:
>On Wed, Feb 16, 2005 at 23:29:24 +0100, Droebbel wrote:
>> On Mi, 2005-02-16 at 22:55 +0100, Droebbel wrote:
>> 
>> >The vmscan-dont-reclaim-too-many-pages.patch led to the said reduction
>> >of writing speed. I reverse-applied it to 2.6.8.1, where it seems to
>> >solve the problem.
>> 
>> Sorry, have to correct that: it seemed to help at my tests with dd
>> (write 1G of zeroes to a file). Copying a file with mc still shows
>> around 1.4MB/s. Could be worse, but is definitely not ok. It *is* better
>> with 2.6.7.
>
>Here are some numbers with my setup. I always wrote 1 GB of data to the
>same DVD-RAM disc (EMTEC), to the device directly and to a fresh ext2
>on
>the disc.
>
>kernel 2.6.10:
>
>$ time { sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=bigfile bs=64k count=16000 ; sync ; }
>
>real    32m5.025s
>
>$ time {sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/cdrom bs=64k count=16000 ; sync ;}
>
>real    29m41.980s
>
>kernel 2.6.7:
>
>$ time { sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=bigfile bs=64k count=16000 ; sync ; }
>
>real    13m23.688s
>
>$ time {sudo dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/cdrom bs=64k count=16000 ; sync ;}
>
>real    13m14.609s

This is what I get:
 2.6.8 to 2.6.10: about 30 min. I think that's clear now. I did not run
any mre test with that.

2.6.7 gives less than 10 minutes.

Reverse-Patched 2.6.8.1 and 2.6.10 about 9-11 min.

But what I think is interesting: Other than with 2.6.7, with my 2.6.10
the result seems to be highly dependent on other io activities. I came
to test that when I saw that writing to dvd-ram slowed down when reading
from a cdrom at the same time. System disk, cdrom and dvd-ram are
connected by buses as independent as possible: hda, hdd and scd0 via
on-chip ide2. hdc is inactive and spun down at the times of testing.

Some results (same command as yours, but writing to file only):

2.6.8.1 with vmscan-dont-reclaim-too-many-pages.patch
and vmscan-scan-sanity.patch reversed:

real    9m17.389s
real    10m11.271s
(run twice)

2.6.10, both patches reversed:

real    10m26.374s

same kernel, some io and high (but niced) system load by reading from
hda and gzipping into /dev/null

real    21m46.795s

same kernel, some io and low load by reading from cdrom (raw read with
dd as well) into /dev/null

real    22m11.639s

2.6.7 vanilla, some io and low load by reading from cdrom (raw read with
dd as well) into /dev/null

real	5m58.092

That's too fast - impossible on 3x media with verification. I'll check
that again. But it *really* seemed to be fast.

I also hat the impression that my tests with 2.6.10 and 2.6.8.1 were
much more promising when run from a rather basic testing system without
X, a bit closer to the 2.6.7 results. Haven't got time to check that
till monday. All the above results except the 2.6.7 are from Ubuntu
(Hoary) Systems with X and Gnome running. 

Regards
David



-
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/