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

    • Wonder what MPs have ties to these privacy/verification/data harvesting companies that are going to step in this time. Last time under the Tories half the cabinet had fingers in the pies, heck even the PM and his wife at the time was working for silicon valley, probably made a fortune.
    • Google Chrome is killing all uBlock Origin bypasses, Microsoft Edge, Opera to follow by Sayan Sen For a while now the transition away from Manifest V2 (MV2) to MV3 has been on-going and it looks like it is entering its final phase of deprecation, at least, in the case of Google Chrome. A recent discussion thread in the w3c WebExtensions Community Group GitHub repo has highlighted how the latest and upcoming versions of the most popular browser are expected to be its final releases with support for MV2 extensions. Chromium contributor Andrey Bershanskiy shared details about recent Chromium changes and according to comments from Google engineer Devlin Cronin, Chrome has now started removing the flags that previously controlled MV2 availability. kExtensionManifestV2Disabled, the Chromium feature flag that allowed controlled disabling of MV2 add-ons, is now completely removed, which means you will likely no longer find uBlock Origin in your browser extensions list. He wrote: "The kExtensionManifestV2Disabled feature has been default-enabled for over a year. Remove the feature and the effectively-dead code. ... Any tests that relied on being in the "warning" phase (i.e., with the kExtensionManifestV2Disabled) for their sole behavior testing are removed, since this stage is no longer reachable." Cronin further explained why MV2 extensions are no longer allowed in supported Chrome versions as maintaining the associated functionality indefinitely is no longer possible. He cited growing technical difficulties and implementation complexities as well as security concerns. He wrote: "MV2 extensions are no longer allowed in any supported version of Chrome, and we are removing support for them and the associated functionality. We won't be able to provide / maintain this functionality indefinitely due to the complexity and tech debt, as well as the security risks it entails (we've actually found a number of bugs that are specific to MV2 lately). Of course, other browsers can continue supporting these if they so desire. Unfortunately, we won't be putting code behind a compilation flag ... We won't be removing all the MV2 code wholesale right away, so many of these things will continue working for awhile (but they will go away eventually, and some may go away sooner than others)." What this essentially means is that the tricks and bypasses that were used to keep MV2 extensions like uBlock Origin and others alive will not work any more on Chrome, or at least not for very long. For example the Windows Registry mod that could extend MV2 availability will cease to function after Chromium version 151. Here is a rundown of the changes coming in the final such releases of Chromium releases: Chromium 150 lost ExtensionManifestV2Disabled option Chromium 151 will loose ExtensionManifestV2Unsupported option Chromium 151 will loose ExtensionManifestV2Availability option Chromium 151 will likely loose AllowLegacyMV2Extensions option Other Chromium-based browsers like Opera and Microsoft Edge could soon follow suit too. Although it is not specified, Edge began disabling uBlock Origin back in February, and Opera could also stop the functioning of MV2 add-ons, even though it had committed to support MV2 for longer in October 2024. uBlock Origin developer Raymond Hill (gorhill) apparently stated the following: "For Opera I did submit 1.70.0 rather late, but this was weeks ago. A while ago I received an email from Opera that they plan to abandon MV2-based extension so maybe they are no longer allocating resources for reviewing such extensions." The email which developers like Gorhill mentions was received from Opera last year. Here is what it seemingly said: Hence for now the only Chromium browser that seems to be on-board fully with MV2 support is Brave, and perhaps Vivaldi as well. Meanwhile if you want to ditch Chromium browsers entirely then Mozilla Firefox is an excellent alternative as MV3 and MV2 are both supported. Of course the easiest solution is to switch to uBlock Origin Lite if you want to remain on Chrome, as it is MV3-based, but from our experience, uBO Lite does not seem to be as good as the original non-Lite version. Source: w3C (GitHub repo) As an online publication, Neowin too relies on ads for operating costs and, if you use an ad blocker, we'd appreciate being whitelisted. In addition, we have an ad-free subscription for $28 a year, which is another way to show support!
    • Write to your MP 😄 Like believing in Santa. Total surveillance IS the goal. Wake up.
    • This whole dumb age verification thing needs to die and be replaced by giving parents tools to control devices. Why am I required to plaster my ID all over the internet to prove I'm old enough when parents should be the ones dictating what their kids are doing on their phones. Apple released great set of tools for iPhones coming to iOS 27 that do just that. Why are governments not mandating that kind of control to phone makers to built them into phones. This whole thing is so absolutely idiotic it's wild.
  • Recent Achievements

    • Very Popular
      Captain_Eric earned a badge
      Very Popular
    • One Month Later
      amusc earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • One Month Later
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Week One Done
      DJC50PLUS earned a badge
      Week One Done
    • Proficient
      Eric Biran went up a rank
      Proficient
  • Popular Contributors

    1. 1
      +primortal
      511
    2. 2
      PsYcHoKiLLa
      220
    3. 3
      ATLien_0
      92
    4. 4
      +Edouard
      90
    5. 5
      Steven P.
      83
  • Tell a friend

    Love Neowin? Tell a friend!