linux-kernel - Re: Why is NCQ enabled by default by libata? (2.6.20)

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Tue, 27 Mar 2007 01:59:21 -0400
From:	Jeff Garzik <jeff@...zik.org>
To:	Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@...idpixels.com>
CC:	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	IDE/ATA development list <linux-ide@...r.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: Why is NCQ enabled by default by libata? (2.6.20)

Justin Piszcz wrote:
> Without NCQ, performance is MUCH better on almost every operation, with 
> the exception of 2-3 items.

Variables to take into account:

* the drive (NCQ performance wildly varies)
* the IO scheduler
* the filesystem (if not measuring direct to blkdev)
* application workload (or in your case, benchmark tool)
	* in particular, the threaded-ness of the apps

For the overwhelming majority of combinations, NCQ should not /hurt/ 
performance.

For the majority of combinations, NCQ helps (though it may not be often 
that you use more than 4-8 tags).

In some cases, NCQ firmware may be broken.  There is a Maxtor firmware 
id, and some Hitachi ids that people are leaning towards recommending be 
added to the libata 'horkage' list.

	Jeff

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