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

[Justin Piszcz <jpiszcz@lucidpixels.com>]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, linux@horizon.com wrote:

>> I meant you do not allocate the entire disk per raidset, which may alter
>> performance numbers.
>
> No, that would be silly.  It does lower the average performance of the
> large RAID-5 area, but I don't know how ext3fs is allocating the blocks
> anyway, so
>
>> 04:00.0 RAID bus controller: Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 3132 Serial ATA Raid II Controller (rev 01)
>> I assume you mean 3132 right?
>
> Yes; did I mistype?
>
> 02:00.0 Mass storage controller: Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 3132 Serial ATA Raid II Controller (rev 01)
> 03:00.0 Mass storage controller: Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 3132 Serial ATA Raid II Controller (rev 01)
> 04:00.0 Mass storage controller: Silicon Image, Inc. SiI 3132 Serial ATA Raid II Controller (rev 01)
>
>> I also have 6 seagates, I'd need to run one
>> of these tests on them as well, also you took the micro jumper off the
>> Seagate 400s in the back as well right?
>
> Um... no, I don't remember doing anything like that.  What micro jumper?
> It's been a while, but I just double-checked the drive manual and
> it doesn't mention any jumpers.
>

The 7200.8's don't use a jumper except for "factory use" - the 7200.9s and 
10s I believe have a jumper in the back to enable/disable 3.0GBps 
operation.  Your model # corresponds with a 7200.8, so nevermind about the 
jumper.

Justin.