Hi guys, On Thu, Jun 2, 2011 at 5:50 PM, Jeffrey Bastian <jbastian@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 2011-05-31 10:00, Jeffrey Bastian wrote: >> I recently ran some bonnie++ benchmarks against both an SD card and a >> USB 2.0 hard drive and I was seeing about 10 MB/sec on the USB drive. >> http://jeffbastian.blogspot.com/2011/05/storage-speed-on-pandaboard.html >> >> This was with the 2.6.35-g6d019da-dirty kernel. >> >> I'll have to try this again with the pings and see if that improves the >> performance. > > > I ran bonnie++ again on my PandaBoard with a USB hard drive and I also > saw the performance double when I was pinging the system. ÂI'm now > getting 18 MB/sec writes and 24 MB/sec reads. > > I posted the full bonnie++ results at: > http://jeffbastian.blogspot.com/2011/06/storage-speed-on-pandaboard-revisited.html Just wondering if someone got on with this. Maybe a tcpdump from the USB-traffic helps. I'd suggest to compare the following a) tcpdump from the USB-storage without pinging b) tcpdump from the USB-storage with pinging (or other usage) tcpdump can capture the USB-traffic (on a similar level as Ethernet), with a command like this: # tcpdump -w /tmp/my-usb-traffic.pcap -s 256 -i usbmon0 usbmon0 captures all USB-traffic, where usbmon<N> captures the traffic from USB-bus <N>. The USB-bus where the device is connected can be found in /proc/bus/usb/devices. tshark (or wireshark) can read the generated .pcap file. In order to make sense out of the bus-numbers and device-IDs, the /proc/bus/usb/devices is very valuable. In case someone decides to make traces available, please provide that file as well. Good luck, Niels _______________________________________________ arm mailing list arm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/arm
