RE: Fusion-MPT much faster as module

2005-03-22 Thread Holger Kiehl
On Tue, 22 Mar 2005, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: Holger, this problem remains unresolved, does it not? Have you done any more experimentation? I must say that something funny seems to be happening here. I have two MPT-based Dell machines, neither of which is u

Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module

2005-03-22 Thread Arjan van de Ven
> > And there are places where it's actually useful: > > #if defined(CONFIG_FOO) || (defined(MODULE) && defined(CONFIG_FOO_MODULE)) > > is a good way to express that driver bar can use functionality of driver > foo if it's available. a good way? I'd disagree with that :) - To unsubscribe

Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module

2005-03-22 Thread Adrian Bunk
On Tue, Mar 22, 2005 at 11:52:22AM +0100, Arjan van de Ven wrote: > On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 02:29 -0800, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > > > Before: > > /dev/sdc: > > Timing buffered disk reads: 92 MB in 3.03 seconds = 30.32 MB/sec > > > > After: > > /dev/sdc: > > Timing buffered disk reads: 174 MB

RE: Fusion-MPT much faster as module

2005-03-22 Thread Arjan van de Ven
On Tue, 2005-03-22 at 02:29 -0800, Chen, Kenneth W wrote: > Before: > /dev/sdc: > Timing buffered disk reads: 92 MB in 3.03 seconds = 30.32 MB/sec > > After: > /dev/sdc: > Timing buffered disk reads: 174 MB in 3.02 seconds = 57.61 MB/sec nice! More proof that #ifdef MODULE is consider

Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module

2005-03-22 Thread Andrew Morton
"Chen, Kenneth W" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: > > Holger, this problem remains unresolved, does it not? Have you done any > > more experimentation? > > > > I must say that something funny seems to be happening here. I have two > > MPT-based Dell machin

RE: Fusion-MPT much faster as module

2005-03-22 Thread Chen, Kenneth W
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: > Holger, this problem remains unresolved, does it not? Have you done any > more experimentation? > > I must say that something funny seems to be happening here. I have two > MPT-based Dell machines, neither of which is using a modular driver: > > akpm:/u

Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module

2005-03-22 Thread Holger Kiehl
On Mon, 21 Mar 2005, Andrew Morton wrote: Holger Kiehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Hello On a four CPU Opteron compiling the Fusion-MPT as module gives much better performance when compiling it in, here some bonnie++ results: Version 1.03 --Sequential Output-- --Sequential Input- --Ra

Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module

2005-03-21 Thread Janne Pikkarainen
Hello everyone, On Mon, 2005-03-21 at 15:27 -0800, Andrew Morton wrote: > > On a four CPU Opteron compiling the Fusion-MPT as module gives much better > > performance when compiling it in, here some bonnie++ results: > > > > Version 1.03 --Sequential Output-- --Sequential Input- >

Re: Fusion-MPT much faster as module

2005-03-21 Thread Andrew Morton
Holger Kiehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello > > On a four CPU Opteron compiling the Fusion-MPT as module gives much better > performance when compiling it in, here some bonnie++ results: > > Version 1.03 --Sequential Output-- --Sequential Input- > --Random- >