Re: [OSR-devel] xkillallprocs and , /etc/xkillall_procs

[gordan <go...@bo...>]

How about adding a debug (-d) switch to killall that makes it report the 
name of the process it is killing?

Gordan

On Wed, 1 Jul 2009, Gordan Bobic wrote:

> On Wed, 1 Jul 2009 13:07:02 +0200, Marc Grimme <gr...@at...> wrote:
>> Hi Gordan,
>> sorry for taking that long.
>
> No problem. This particular thing is only an issue at shutdown and I don't
> down my servers very often. And even then it's not a problem with
> functioning fencing devices. ;)
>
>>> What is the difference between these two files? I noticed that
>>> /etc/xkillallprocs got clobbered after a reboot, and the two lines I
>>> added
>>> to it (glusterfs and glusterfsd) got removed. On shutdown, with the file
>>
>> Yes they got removed. Basically they should be built automatically.
>> The procs are got from a function called {rootfs}_get_userspace_procs. In
>> your case it should be glusterfs_userspace_procs.
>
> Aha! That's what I'm missing! Thank you!
>
>>> edited to add those two, shutdown with glusterfs still locks up
>>> immediately
>>> after "sending all processes the TERM signal". Any ideas on how to debug
>>> this further? My gut feeling is that glusterfs ends up getting killed
> and
>>> the machine locks up because the rootfs went away, but it's quite hard
>>> investigate a system in such a hung state.
>>
>> Yes. It is. I always add /bin/bash(s) at every step in the relevant
>> initscripts. But I would say if you get that xkillallprocs right it
> should
>> work.
>
> I was thinking about something similar, but with double-wrapping init so
> that there is an init for the base root that can run gettys, and have a
> base root shell available to investigate things when they get going. It was
> sufficiently complicated to implement to deter me, at least for now,
> though. The bash-at-every-line idea has more short-term merit. :)
>
>> You also need the /usr/comoonics/sbin/killall binary which does not kill
>> _ALL_
>> userproceses but can exclude the ones in i.e. /etc/xkillallprocs.
>
> Last I checked, that was in the halt patch that gets applied automatically.
> Has that changed recently?
>
>> For a little backround see:
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496843
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496854
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496857
>> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=496861
>
> Indeed, I'm aware of the background. I was just failing to figure out where
> the exclusion list gets set. Having said that, if i manually modify the
> /etc/xkillallprocs, should that not be honoured at least in the next
> shutdown? I've found that the shutdown hangs even when I add glusterfs
> processes to it.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Gordan
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> _______________________________________________
> Open-sharedroot-devel mailing list
> Ope...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/open-sharedroot-devel
>