On Tue, 30 Apr 2024 at 16:28, Christian Loehle <christian.loehle@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Is this an issue for delay > 0 too somehow? I believe it is. If there is simply no IO to the delay device, then nothing will wake the new thread and the same issue will occur. I haven't yet reproduced this case, because the system I am testing on submits reads on any new block device and I don't know offhand how to disable them. I think the reads are from scans for multipathd, bcachefs or similar. > Indeed if we don't have a delay the process will never be woken up, > but in that case, why create the worker in the first place? I agree. If this were only an issue with delay == 0, it would make more sense not to create the worker at all. As mentioned above, I believe the issue can occur with delay > 0. So not creating the worker in the delay == 0 case is an additional optimization and out of the scope of this change. > You're missing lkml as recipient btw. Thanks for the pointer and thanks for your response! Best regards, Joel
