Date: Fri, 03 Jul 2009 17:30:05 -0400 From: Mike Tancsa <mike@sentex.net> To: Alexander Motin <mav@FreeBSD.org> Cc: FreeBSD-Current <freebsd-current@FreeBSD.org>, scottl@FreeBSD.org Subject: Re: RFC: ATA to CAM integration patch (INTEL DX58SO) Message-ID: <200907032127.n63LRpO9019250@lava.sentex.ca> In-Reply-To: <4A4E5C82.9070209@FreeBSD.org> References: <4A4517BE.9040504@FreeBSD.org> <200906272303.n5RN3rTi070177@lava.sentex.ca> <4A471F44.7010108@FreeBSD.org> <200907021859.n62IxghN009931@lava.sentex.ca> <4A4D0B7E.8060503@FreeBSD.org> <200907022117.n62LHrvZ010791@lava.sentex.ca> <200907031326.n63DQCGM016627@lava.sentex.ca> <4A4E0D51.3080904@FreeBSD.org> <200907031413.n63ED2jl016885@lava.sentex.ca> <4A4E1525.2040809@FreeBSD.org> <200907031430.n63EUMH1016965@lava.sentex.ca> <4A4E1A6C.3090605@FreeBSD.org> <200907031858.n63IwDIt018455@lava.sentex.ca> <4A4E5C82.9070209@FreeBSD.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
At 03:31 PM 7/3/2009, Alexander Motin wrote:
>It would be more interesting to investigate benefits on NCQ suitable
>workload, as that are new for us. Something like unpacking a lot of
>small files to normal or async-mounted or gjournalled FS, or some
>multi-threaded read, or something else. Would be nice to understand
>on which types of workload NCQ could give us visible effects.
>
>You can track real requests parallelism by looking on dev_active
>field of `camcontrol tags ada0 -v`.
We dont have too many disk I/O bound apps here. Where we do, we
typically have used raid controllers in RAID10. But I will
experiment a little more over the weekend. For us, we are interested
in large amounts of storage for backup purposes. Having things like
port multiplier features are very nice to have. But I will try some
random io tests to see if I can measure a difference.
>>The eSata port does not work, but it never did under the old driver
>>either. I think it has a separate controller ? At the BIOS boot up
>>time, it shows some Marvell controller talking to the eSata
>>attached drive, and pciconf does show a separate ATA controller
>>atapci0@pci0:6:0:0: class=0x01018f card=0x4f538086
>>chip=0x612111ab rev=0xb2 hdr=0x00
>> vendor = 'Marvell Semiconductor (Was: Galileo Technology Ltd)'
>> device = '6121 SATA2 Controller'
>> class = mass storage
>> subclass = ATA
>> cap 01[48] = powerspec 2 supports D0 D1 D3 current D0
>> cap 05[50] = MSI supports 1 message
>> cap 10[e0] = PCI-Express 1 legacy endpoint max data 128(128) link x1(x1)
>
>But this device, implementing both PATA and SATA ports, report
>itself as PATA controller. It's SATA part may be AHCI compatible,
>but driver unable to attach it due to incorrect device
>identification. Alike happens to my JMicron controllers, but in that
>case system BIOS is able to switch it into the right mode with
>separate PATA and AHCI SATA controllers devices.
Looking in the BIOS, I am able to toggle IDE and RAID mode only for
the eSata controller portion, where as I have IDE, AHCI and RAID for
the onboard Intel controller.
---Mike
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?200907032127.n63LRpO9019250>