[systemd-devel] is the watchdog useful?

[Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek]

On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 02:56:55PM -0700, Vito Caputo wrote:
> On Thu, Oct 24, 2019 at 10:45:32AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 04:35:13AM -0700, Vito Caputo wrote:
> > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 10:51:49AM +0000, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 at 12:34:45PM +0200, Umut Tezduyar Lindskog wrote:
> > > > > I am curious Zbigniew of how you find out if the coredump was on a starved
> > > > > process?
> > > > 
> > > > A very common case is systemd-journald which gets SIGABRT when in a
> > > > read() or write() or similar syscall. Another case is when
> > > > systemd-udevd workers get ABRT when doing open() on a device.
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > In the case of journald, is it really in read()/write() syscalls you're
> > > seeing the SIGABRTs?
> > 
> > I was sloppy here — it's not read/write, but various other syscalls.
> > In particular clone(), which makes sense, because it involves memory
> > allocation.
> > 
> 
> That's interesting, it's not like journald calls clone() a lot. 

Hm, maybe it was udevd that was calling clone(), not journald.
All the reports are available here:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1300212

I opened a pull request to make the watchdog setting configurable
for our own internal services: https://github.com/systemd/systemd/pull/13843.

Zbyszek