Description of problem: It could be observed kernel generates 'extra' DM events about reaching low water mark for a data device when this actually never happened. The simple scenario how to reach it - keep 'lvm.conf thin_pool_autoextend_threshold = 100 (so there is no interaction with dmeventd & autoresize) lvcreate -L10 vg/pool -V9 -n thinLV1 lvcreate -V1 -n thinLV2 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/vg/thinLV1 bs=1M count=9 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/vg/thinLV2 bs=512 count=1 lvs -a show something like this: lvs -a LV VG Attr LSize Pool Origin Data% Meta% Move Log Cpy%Sync Convert [lvol0_pmspare] vg ewi------- 2,00m pool vg twi-aotz-- 10,00m 90,62 2,15 [pool_tdata] vg Twi-ao---- 10,00m [pool_tmeta] vg ewi-ao---- 2,00m thinLV1 vg Vwi-a-tz-- 9,00m pool 100,00 thinLV2 vg Vwi-a-tz-- 1,00m pool 6,25 'dmesg -c' should have no evidence of watermark event. dmsetup table should be showing this thin-pool table line: vg-pool-tpool: 0 20480 thin-pool 253:0 253:1 128 0 0 and status line: vg-pool-tpool: 0 20480 thin-pool 2 11/512 145/160 - rw discard_passdown queue_if_no_space - now: blkdiscard /dev/vg/thinLV1 and refill device again: dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/vg/thinLV1 bs=1M count=9 dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/vg/thinLV2 bs=512 count=1 now one may observe in dmesg (not always but frequently): 'device-mapper: thin: 253:2: reached low water mark for data device: sending event' but thin-pool stats are: vg-pool-tpool: 0 20480 thin-pool 2 11/512 145/160 - rw discard_passdown queue_if_no_space - So there should be no reason to 'report' any fullness. (and in this case watermark is 0 - so only 100% full pool should be generating event) Impact of this BZ is possibly 'low' - but may consume some extra CPU/RAM resources on processing of unneeded event. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): 4.10.0-0.rc2.git2.1.fc26.x86_64 How reproducible: Not always - but usually after creation on new thin-pool and following above steps - very high chance to hit. Steps to Reproduce: 1. 2. 3. Actual results: Expected results: Additional info:
still an issue? is it a kernel issue?