Andriy, I'm not familiar with spa_async_thread_vd() (I don't believe that is upstreamed yet) so I can't comment on what is the correct thing to do there. As for spa_async_thread(), I think we can ignore all tasks when the pool is read-only. You'll probably need to update the call to vdev_probe() in zio_vdev_io_done() so that we only call it if spa_writeable().
Thanks, George On Tue, Oct 17, 2017 at 1:40 PM Andriy Gapon <a...@freebsd.org> wrote: > > Both spa_async_thread() and spa_async_thread_vd() assert that spa_sync_on > is > true. I think that the logic to ensure that is sound except for one case. > Specifically, if a pool is imported read-only, then spa_sync_on is never > set to > true (which is correct), but spa_async_suspended is not incremented either. > So, spa_async_request() ==> spa_async_dispatch_vd() does not bail out and > spa_async_thread_vd gets executed. > > I am actually not sure what's the best thing to do here for a read-only > pool. > On the one hand, we should not touch its on-disk configuration, on the > other > hand it seems that we should update the in-memory state of vdevs. > > Maybe the assertion simply can be dropped? > I am not sure if spa_async_thread_vd() really depends on spa_sync being > active. > What do you think? > > -- > Andriy Gapon ------------------------------------------ openzfs-developer Archives: https://openzfs.topicbox.com/groups/developer/discussions/Tbc5170d4f71ec486-M4666ec33d56c533e901ac0d4 Powered by Topicbox: https://topicbox.com
