Bug 64378 - Using parameter "-t" and get poor result with VIA 8231/8233 in RH7.2
Summary: Using parameter "-t" and get poor result with VIA 8231/8233 in RH7.2
Keywords:
Status: CLOSED CURRENTRELEASE
Alias: None
Product: Red Hat Linux
Classification: Retired
Component: hdparm
Version: 7.2
Hardware: All
OS: Linux
medium
medium
Target Milestone: ---
Assignee: Karsten Hopp
QA Contact: Aaron Brown
URL:
Whiteboard:
Depends On:
Blocks:
TreeView+ depends on / blocked
 
Reported: 2002-05-03 05:11 UTC by Joseph
Modified: 2016-09-25 11:09 UTC (History)
0 users

Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Clone Of:
Environment:
Last Closed: 2003-09-01 14:38:56 UTC
Embargoed:


Attachments (Terms of Use)


Links
System ID Private Priority Status Summary Last Updated
oVirt gerrit 64383 0 master NEW core: Make CommandHelper.canDoAction accept CommandContext 2016-09-25 11:09:24 UTC

Description Joseph 2002-05-03 05:11:44 UTC
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 5.01; Windows NT 5.0; KKman2.0)

Description of problem:
When using "hdparm -t /dev/hda", I got poor result with VIA8231/8233 in RH7.2. 
But in 7.1, the result is satisfied.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):


How reproducible:
Always

Steps to Reproduce:
1.using a VIA 8231/8233 SB and a ATA100 HDD then install RH7.2
2.after installation, login the system
3.run the command "hdparm -t /dev/hda"

	

Actual Results:  The result is poor than we expected!! (5~7MB/sec)
And the kernel doesn't know the SB (8231/8233) in boot time (dmesg).

Expected Results:  The result should be shown as a ATA100 HDD does.
And the kernel should  know the 8231/8233.

Additional info:

If we use VIA 8231/8233 SB and a ATA100 HDD in Redhat 7.2, use the parameter "-
t" and the result (5~7MB/sec)is more poor than we expect.
But in RH7.1 the result (29~30MB/sec) is fine.
After checking the boot message, I found the kernel doesnot know 8231/8233 SB 
in RH7.2, but they can be known in RH7.1.
And I viewed the VIA IDE driver(Ver 3.23) found that, 8231/8233 were placed in 
the section "VIA_New_Bridges_tested" in RH7.2. But in RH7.1, 8231/8233 were 
placed with other chips (IDE ver3.20).


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.