| 1 |
On Sat, Sep 17, 2022 at 8:21 AM johnstrass <johnstrass@×××.com> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> |
| 4 |
> Why is the logind so fragile? |
| 5 |
|
| 6 |
Have you checked your logs. I'm guessing that the kernel OOM killer |
| 7 |
is killing it, and it is kind of hard for a process to not die when |
| 8 |
the kernel kills it. |
| 9 |
|
| 10 |
> Why cannot it be brought up again after the memeory become available again? |
| 11 |
|
| 12 |
I suspect it probably could be - probably not a failure mode upstream |
| 13 |
has paid much attention to. If the OOM killer is loose on your |
| 14 |
system, general breakage is to be expected. It is actually surprising |
| 15 |
though that it didn't go after gcc itself. I'd check the logs. |
| 16 |
|
| 17 |
You probably could tweak the unit setting so that logind is less |
| 18 |
likely to get prioritized. Then it might go after something less |
| 19 |
essential like sshd or postfix. :) |
| 20 |
|
| 21 |
Also possible that it isn't logind itself but something else it uses |
| 22 |
for IPC. Haven't looked into the gory details of how it works. |
| 23 |
|
| 24 |
I'm guessing systemd could be coaxed to shut down without it. It |
| 25 |
might actually do that on its own if you give it time, but I haven't |
| 26 |
checked the settings. |
| 27 |
|
| 28 |
-- |
| 29 |
Rich |
Archives