[systemd-devel] [lennart at kemper.freedesktop.org: [systemd-commits] src/pam-module.c]

[Andrey Borzenkov]

On Tue, Feb 8, 2011 at 12:03 PM, Lennart Poettering
<lennart at poettering.net> wrote:
> On Tue, 08.02.11 11:27, Andrey Borzenkov (arvidjaar at mail.ru) wrote:
>
>> >> Yupp, there's a ControlGroups=cpu:/ missing in the rtkit service file. I
>> >> have forgotten to commit that. Will fix this soon.
>> >
>> > Fixed now in rtkit and systemd git.
>> >
>>
>> The last commit on http://git.0pointer.de/?p=rtkit.git is 6 months
>> old. Is it the wrong URL?
>
> Nah, I just wrote the mail first and only then pushed. I didn't expect
> you to check git so quickly ;-).
>
> The commit is now there.
>
>> Also the only new commit in systemd is
>>
>> commit b20c6be697ded108e3c3bd5b8812fee13326eefc
>> Author: Lennart Poettering <lennart at poettering.net>
>> Date:   Fri Feb 4 12:46:38 2011 +0100
>>
>>     pam: optionally reset cgroup memberships for login sessions
>>
>> It does not look like it applies to rtkit?
>
> Actually it does.
>
> The rtkit patch ensures rtkit itself can get RT privs. This systemd
> patch ensures apps (such as PA) started within a systemd session can get
> RT privs. Without neither patch neither side can get RT privs. To work
> properly both sides need to be able to get RT privs.
>

Do  I need this patch to *strart* rtkit?

{pts/0}% sudo systemctl status rtkit-daemon.service
rtkit-daemon.service - RealtimeKit Scheduling Policy Service
          Loaded: loaded (/lib/systemd/system/rtkit-daemon.service)
          Active: active (running) since Tue, 08 Feb 2011 12:22:30 +0300; 5s ago
        Main PID: 13399 (rtkit-daemon)
          Status: "Running."
          CGroup: name=systemd:/system/rtkit-daemon.service
                  └ 13399 /usr/lib64/rtkit-daemon

Feb  8 12:22:30 cooker rtkit-daemon[13399]: Failed to make ourselves
RT: Operation not permitted


{pts/1}% systemctl --no-pager --property=ControlGroups show rtkit-daemon.service
ControlGroups=name=systemd:/system/rtkit-daemon.service cpu:/

BTW property name is incinsistent between unit definition and
systemctl output - ControlGroup vs. ControlGroups. Is it intentional?