Speeding up Linux Using hdparm


Recommended Posts

Speeding up Linux Using hdparm
by Rob Flickenger
06/29/2000 
Are you running an Intel Linux system with at least one (E)IDE hard drive?

Wouldn't it be neat if there were a magical command to instantly double the I/O performance of your disks? Or, in some cases, show 6 to 10 times your existing throughput?

Did you ever just wonder how to tell what kind of performance you're getting on your "tricked-out" Linux box?

Don't overlook hdparm(8). If you've never heard of it, don't worry. Most people I've talked to haven't either. But if you're running an IDE/Linux system (as many folks are,) you'll wonder how you ever got this far without it. I know I did.

What's the big deal?
So, you've got your brand-new UltraATA/66 EIDE drive with a screaming brand-new controller chipset that supports multiple PIO modes and DMA and the leather seat option and extra chrome... But is your system actually taking advantage of these snazzy features? The hdparm(8) command will not only tell you how your drives are performing, but will let you tweak them out to your heart's content.

Now before you get too excited, it is worth pointing out that under some circumstances, these commands CAN CAUSE UNEXPECTED DATA CORRUPTION! Use them at your own risk! At the very least, back up your box and bring it down to single-user mode before proceeding.

With the usual disclaimer out of the way, I'd like to point out that if you are using current hardware (i.e. your drive AND controller AND motherboard were manufactured in the last two or three years), you are at considerably lower risk. I've used these commands on several boxes with various hardware configurations, and the worst I've seen happen is the occasional hang, with no data problems on reboot. And no matter how much you might whine at me and the world in general for your personal misfortune, we all know who is ultimately responsible for the well-being of YOUR box: YOU ARE. Caveat Fair Reader.

Now, then. If I haven't scared you away yet, try this (as root, preferably in single-user mode):

hdparm -Tt /dev/hda
You'll see something like:

/dev/hda:
 Timing buffer-cache reads:   128 MB in  1.34 seconds =95.52 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in 17.86 seconds = 3.58 MB/sec
What does this tell us? The -T means to test the cache system (i.e., the memory, CPU, and buffer cache). The -t means to report stats on the disk in question, reading data not in the cache. The two together, run a couple of times in a row in single-user mode, will give you an idea of the performance of your disk I/O system. (These are actual numbers from a PII/350 / 128M Ram / newish EIDE HD; your numbers will vary.)

But even with varying numbers, 3.58 MB/sec is PATHETIC for the above hardware. I thought the ad for the HD said something about 66MB per second!!?!? What gives?

Well, let's find out more about how Linux is addressing your drive:

hdparm /dev/hda

/dev/hda:
 multcount    =  0 (off)
 I/O support  =  0 (default 16-bit)
 unmaskirq    =  0 (off)
 using_dma    =  0 (off)
 keepsettings =  0 (off)
 nowerr       =  0 (off)
 readonly     =  0 (off)
 readahead    =  8 (on)
 geometry     = 1870/255/63, sectors = 30043440, start = 0
These are the defaults. Nice, safe, but not necessarily optimal. What's all this about 16-bit mode? I thought that went out with the 386! And why are most of the other options turned off?

Well, it's generally considered a good idea for any self-respecting distribution to install itself in the kewlest, slickest, but SAFEST way it possibly can. The above settings are virtually guaranteed to work on any hardware you might throw at it. But since we know we're throwing something more than a dusty, 8-year-old, 16-bit multi-IO card at it, let's talk about the interesting options:

multcount: Short for multiple sector count. This controls how many sectors are fetched from the disk in a single I/O interrupt. Almost all modern IDE drives support this. The man page claims: 


When this feature is enabled, it typically reduces operating system overhead for disk I/O by 30-50%. On many systems, it also provides increased data throughput of anywhere from 5% to 50%.
I/O support: This is a big one. This flag controls how data is passed from the PCI bus to the controller. Almost all modern controller chipsets support mode 3, or 32-bit mode w/sync. Some even support 32-bit async. Turning this on will almost certainly double your throughput (see below.) 


unmaskirq: Turning this on will allow Linux to unmask other interrupts while processing a disk interrupt. What does that mean? It lets Linux attend to other interrupt-related tasks (i.e., network traffic) while waiting for your disk to return with the data it asked for. It should improve overall system response time, but be warned: Not all hardware configurations will be able to handle it. See the manpage. 


using_dma: DMA can be a tricky business. If you can get your controller and drive using a DMA mode, do it. But I have seen more than one machine hang while playing with this option. Again, see the manpage (and the example on the next page)! 






Turbocharged
So, since we have our system in single-user mode like a good little admin, let's try out some turbo settings:

hdparm -c3 -m16 /dev/hda

/dev/hda:
 setting 32-bit I/O support flag to 3
 setting multcount to 16
 multcount    =  16 (on)
 I/O support  =  3 (32-bit w/sync)

Great! 32-bit sounds nice. And some multi-reads might work. Let's re-run the benchmark:

hdparm -tT /dev/hda


/dev/hda:
 Timing buffer-cache reads:   128 MB in  1.41 seconds =90.78 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  9.84 seconds = 6.50 MB/sec
WOW! Almost double the disk throughput without really trying! Incredible.

But wait, there's more: We're still not unmasking interrupts, using DMA, or even a using decent PIO mode! Of course, enabling these gets riskier. (Why is it always a trade-off between freedom and security?) The man page mentions trying Multiword DMA mode2, so:

hdparm -X34 -d1 -u1 /dev/hda
...Unfortunately this seems to be unsupported on this particular box (it hung like an NT box running a Java app.) So, after rebooting it (again in single-user mode), I went with this:

hdparm -X66 -d1 -u1 -m16 -c3 /dev/hda

/dev/hda:
 setting 32-bit I/O support flag to 3
 setting multcount to 16
 setting unmaskirq to 1 (on)
 setting using_dma to 1 (on)
 setting xfermode to 66 (UltraDMA mode2)
 multcount    = 16 (on)
 I/O support  =  3 (32-bit w/sync)
 unmaskirq    =  1 (on)
 using_dma    =  1 (on)
And then checked:

hdparm -tT /dev/hda

/dev/hda:
 Timing buffer-cache reads:   128 MB in  1.43 seconds =89.51 MB/sec
 Timing buffered disk reads:  64 MB in  3.18 seconds =20.13 MB/sec

20.13 MB/sec. A far cry from the miniscule 3.58 we started with...

By the way, notice how we specified the -m16 and -c3 switch again? That's because it doesn't remember your hdparm settings between reboots. Be sure to add the above line to your /etc/rc.d/* scripts once you're sure the system is stable (and preferably after your fsck runs; having an extensive fs check run with your controller in a flaky mode may be a good way to generate vast quantities of entropy, but it's no way to administer a system. At least not with a straight face...)

Now, after running the benchmark a few more times, reboot in multi-user mode and fire up X. Load Netscape. And try not to fall out of your chair.

In conclusion
This is one of those interesting little tidbits that escapes many "seasoned" Linux veterans, especially since one never sees any indication that the system isn't using the most optimal settings. (Gee, all my kernel messages have looked fine....) And using hdparm isn't completely without risk, but is well worth investigating.

And it doesn't stop at performance: hdparm lets you adjust various power saving modes as well. See the hdparm(8) for the final word.

Many thanks to Mark Lord for putting together this nifty utility. If your particular distribution doesn't include hdparm (usually in /sbin or /usr/sbin), get it from the source at http://metalab.unc.edu/pub/Linux/system/hardware/

Happy hacking!

Rob Flickenger is the author of three O'Reilly books: Building Wireless Community Networks, 2nd Edition, Linux Server Hacks, and Wireless Hacks. 


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Discuss this article in the O'Reilly Network Linux Forum.

Return to the Linux DevCenter.



oreillynet.com Copyright ? 2003 O'Reilly & Associates, Inc.

Link to comment
https://www.neowin.net/forum/topic/137915-speeding-up-linux-using-hdparm/
Share on other sites

  • 1 year later...
  • 2 months later...

:o

Oh no. He didn't just say that, did he? :rofl:

I used to moderate here, until I found that too much of my free time was spent cleaning up, and looking for rule violations and mis-placed threads. I became obsessive-compulsive about being available to keep things in proper order.

Now I just let the staff do it (and those guys really put a LOT of effort into making Neowin a great place, I know!) and I am much happier. The kids get to see more of daddy, too, and I spend more time pitching them baseballs and such. :)

  • 4 weeks later...

Pretty cool

The correct dma modes are usually set by default either way

my hitachi eide laptop drive was missing -m16 -u1 -c3 although I didn't see any performance increase, at least I know I have it set up correctly now

both my optorite cd/dvd drives on my laptop/pc were missing -c3

I have added these settings to my /etc/rc.local (ubuntu/debian)

hdparm can't acces my SATA drive but I would guess it is optimally configured by default

It also might be worth settings -A1 (enable drive lookahead feature) and -W1 (enable write caching feature) on the HDD

Edited by Z3r0

thanks for that information daPhoenix, I downloaded sdparm via apt

sdparm is for scsi drives and works with the sata drives too

lots of information via sdparm --enquire --all /dev/sda and sdparm --all /dev/sda to see valid options

try this too sdparm --enumerate --page ca to see the caching options page, sdparm --page=ca to see the value of WCE if WCE=1 then write caching is enabled

can't see much else to play with though

This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Posts

    • "just $100 per TB"? Just? Are we trying to make this seem like the new normal? Kinda weird to make it sound like that is not a ridiculously expensive asking price.
    • The reviews you refer to mean nothing. Where there is no journalism there is no reason to call the gaming media's opinion pieces "reviews". For GP games there is indeed a metric for success - increasing subscriptions. Which turns in revenue. The only circumstance in which subs do not rise when great is being released is a Game Pass system where the company is close to fully saturated with customers in a subscription. However, in that case as the theory goes you spend aplenty in all kind of games - from shady live service cash cows and customer offending agitprop crap in purple colours to robust and entertaining single player games. And keep a solid level of profitability. Ignoring the simply innocuous but mid games MGS has released primarily of the second kind.
    • Report: Microsoft to use AWS to help GitHub deal with a major surge in demand by Pradeep Viswanathan Thanks to the surge of coding AI agents, GitHub's usage has skyrocketed over the past 12 months. To meet this demand, GitHub started with a plan in October 2025 to increase capacity by 10x. However, by early this year, the company realized that it needed 30x scale. This rapid growth has caused severe strain on the platform's reliability, resulting in several small outages over the past few months. In April, GitHub published a long blog post explaining the steps it is taking to resolve these reliability issues. In the post, the company also confirmed that it is working toward a multi-cloud architecture for better resilience. Today, Business Insider reported that GitHub is turning to Amazon Web Services to help deal with a major surge in AI-driven coding activity. It is important to note that GitHub is still in the process of moving completely to the Azure cloud. The current plan is to move the platform fully to Azure by 2027 so that it can scale better as per developer demand. Therefore, the current decision to utilize AWS might be part of a short-term plan to meet immediate demand. A Microsoft spokesperson confirmed that GitHub is using multiple cloud providers with the following statement: For Microsoft, the decision highlights the operational pressure behind the AI boom. GitHub has to stay reliable for developers at a time when rivals such as Codex, Cursor, Claude Code, and other AI coding tools are gaining attention. And the decision to use AWS for computing capacity seems practical given the circumstances.
    • It's growing on me, however, your right, it make better usability sense if the tabs were bellow the address bar.
    • Qwen 3.6 is better value per dollar, and you can run it locally for free.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Collaborator
      vjlex earned a badge
      Collaborator
    • Reacting Well
      Dys Topia earned a badge
      Reacting Well
    • Conversation Starter
      NovaEdgeX earned a badge
      Conversation Starter
    • One Year In
      Console General earned a badge
      One Year In
    • Week One Done
      Twozo Technologies earned a badge
      Week One Done
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      517
    2. 2
      +Edouard
      182
    3. 3
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      106
    4. 4
      Steven P.
      88
    5. 5
      ATLien_0
      68
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!