From owner-freebsd-current@FreeBSD.ORG Tue Oct 8 00:49:20 2013 Return-Path: Delivered-To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Received: from mx1.freebsd.org (mx1.freebsd.org [IPv6:2001:1900:2254:206a::19:1]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ADH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by hub.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 37FE04E2; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 00:49:20 +0000 (UTC) (envelope-from mcdouga9@egr.msu.edu) Received: from mail.egr.msu.edu (hill.egr.msu.edu [35.9.37.162]) by mx1.freebsd.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0D1E7227B; Tue, 8 Oct 2013 00:49:19 +0000 (UTC) Received: from hill (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by mail.egr.msu.edu (Postfix) with ESMTP id 693C62F87E; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 20:42:16 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at egr.msu.edu Received: from mail.egr.msu.edu ([127.0.0.1]) by hill (hill.egr.msu.edu [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id h77SXn4RYLXK; Mon, 7 Oct 2013 20:42:16 -0400 (EDT) Received: from EGR authenticated sender Message-ID: <525354E6.7040506@egr.msu.edu> Date: Mon, 07 Oct 2013 20:42:14 -0400 From: Adam McDougall User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; FreeBSD amd64; rv:24.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/24.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Adrian Chadd Subject: Re: Buying recommendation for silent router/fileserver References: <20121011145453.GU69724@acme.spoerlein.net> <20121011160521.GB40357@in-addr.com> <5076F955.8070207@egr.msu.edu> <507833E1.4070505@egr.msu.edu> In-Reply-To: <507833E1.4070505@egr.msu.edu> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-BeenThere: freebsd-current@freebsd.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: Discussions about the use of FreeBSD-current List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 08 Oct 2013 00:49:20 -0000 Finally got around to it, kern/182818. Thanks for the encouragement. On 10/12/12 11:14, Adam McDougall wrote: > I did not, but I put it on my list to try to accomplish. > > On 10/11/12 13:41, Adrian Chadd wrote: >> Did you ever file a PR for the slow SATA behaviour? >> >> >> >> Adrian >> >> >> On 11 October 2012 09:52, Adam McDougall wrote: >>> >>> Be wary of the Soekris net6501, I bought three of the 1.6Ghz net6501-70 >>> model which has an Atom E-680 cpu (E series) and it compiles more >>> than twice >>> as slow as a 1.6Ghz Atom N270 in an older netbook. Someone else >>> running >>> Linux reported similar CPU slowness. As far as practical network >>> throughput, I could only get 100Mbit/sec with a simple HTTP download >>> of a >>> file full of zeros, and OpenVPN could only push about 25Mbit/sec. As a >>> practical example of the CPU slowness, it takes about 1.5 minutes to >>> compile >>> pkg on the N270 netbook and 5 minutes on the 6501 (around 4.5 if I >>> use -j2). >>> A kernel compile took an hour. Unfortunately I had no idea this CPU >>> (possibly implementation?) was so slow before I purchased it, and I >>> could >>> scarcely find evidence of it on google after hours of searching when >>> I had >>> already discovered the issue. I was hoping to find some comparative >>> benchmarks between various Atom series but manufacturers generally >>> don't do >>> that. >>> >>> Additionally, the total AHCI SATA write speed on the net6501 (in BSD >>> only?) >>> has a strange 20MB/sec limitation but reads can go over 100MB/sec. >>> If I >>> write to one disk I get 20MB/sec, if I write to both SATA disks I get >>> 10MB/sec each. Write is equally slow on a SSD. Both someone running >>> OpenBSD and I running FreeBSD reported the same symptoms to the >>> soekris-tech >>> mailing list and received no useful replies towards getting that >>> problem >>> solved. I tested the write speed briefly with Linux and it did not >>> appear >>> to have the 20MB/sec limitation. I did confirm it was using >>> MSI(-X?) with >>> boot -v. I think this hardware would need to fall into Alexander >>> Motin's >>> hands to get anywhere with debugging the SATA speed issue. Since it >>> seems >>> fine in Linux, maybe some day it can be fixed in BSD but I have no >>> clue how >>> that limitation could happen. The disks I tested with are fine in >>> normal >>> computers. >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> freebsd-current@freebsd.org mailing list >>> http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-current >>> To unsubscribe, send any mail to >>> "freebsd-current-unsubscribe@freebsd.org" >