On my Fedora 19 i686 I see weird thing - when killing processes (by commands as:
killall -9 kactivitymanagerd killall -9 gam_server killall -9 kded4 killall -9 systemd killall -9 atril
or with PID:
kill -9 1 1322 10612 10619
), then processes stay running - they are not zombies (for PID=1 be zombie perhaps does not make sense), but eat CPU, occupy memory etc. I cannot say this behavior is always (I'm killing processes only when I need it), but I saw this several times, with last Fedora distros.
It is bad glibc signal() implementation or what else?
Regards, Franta Hanzlik
On 29.11.2013 20:41, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote:
On my Fedora 19 i686 I see weird thing - when killing processes (by commands as:
killall -9 kactivitymanagerd killall -9 gam_server killall -9 kded4 killall -9 systemd killall -9 atril
or with PID:
kill -9 1 1322 10612 10619
), then processes stay running - they are not zombies (for PID=1 be zombie perhaps does not make sense), but eat CPU, occupy memory etc. I cannot say this behavior is always (I'm killing processes only when I need it), but I saw this several times, with last Fedora distros.
It is bad glibc signal() implementation or what else?
Regards, Franta Hanzlik
http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/5642/what-if-kill-9-does-not-work
Mateusz Marzantowicz
Mateusz Marzantowicz wrote:
On 29.11.2013 20:41, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote:
On my Fedora 19 i686 I see weird thing - when killing processes (by commands as:
killall -9 kactivitymanagerd killall -9 gam_server killall -9 kded4 killall -9 systemd killall -9 atril
or with PID:
kill -9 1 1322 10612 10619
), then processes stay running - they are not zombies (for PID=1 be zombie perhaps does not make sense), but eat CPU, occupy memory etc. I cannot say this behavior is always (I'm killing processes only when I need it), but I saw this several times, with last Fedora distros.
It is bad glibc signal() implementation or what else?
Regards, Franta Hanzlik
http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/5642/what-if-kill-9-does-not-work
Mateusz Marzantowicz
Thank for link, but I'm not a lot smarter. Maybe Linux immunize system init (PID 1) against SIGKILL (but I was working on Unices where SIGKILL to init caused clean & immediate system halt - kernel flush buffers, unmount FSs and halt machine), but what SIGKILL to other processes? I was killing them as root, and as I wrote before, they was not zombies and possibly nor in uninterruptible sleep - 'top' utility shows as they consumes eg. several or several tens percents CPU. Then, according to Your link, is only other possibility bad Linux kernel?
Franta
On 30.11.2013 00:10, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote:
Mateusz Marzantowicz wrote:
On 29.11.2013 20:41, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote:
On my Fedora 19 i686 I see weird thing - when killing processes (by commands as:
killall -9 kactivitymanagerd killall -9 gam_server killall -9 kded4 killall -9 systemd killall -9 atril
or with PID:
kill -9 1 1322 10612 10619
), then processes stay running - they are not zombies (for PID=1 be zombie perhaps does not make sense), but eat CPU, occupy memory etc. I cannot say this behavior is always (I'm killing processes only when I need it), but I saw this several times, with last Fedora distros.
It is bad glibc signal() implementation or what else?
Regards, Franta Hanzlik
http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/5642/what-if-kill-9-does-not-work
Mateusz Marzantowicz
Thank for link, but I'm not a lot smarter. Maybe Linux immunize system init (PID 1) against SIGKILL (but I was working on Unices where SIGKILL to init caused clean & immediate system halt - kernel flush buffers, unmount FSs and halt machine), but what SIGKILL to other processes? I was killing them as root, and as I wrote before, they was not zombies and possibly nor in uninterruptible sleep - 'top' utility shows as they consumes eg. several or several tens percents CPU. Then, according to Your link, is only other possibility bad Linux kernel?
Does it happen always regardless system load and ongoing IO operations? It was mentioned in that article that the result of kill -9 might not be immediate depending on what is occupying your kernel.
Please also note, that you can't kill systemd (PID 1) on Linux because it's init process and it doesn't have much sense. To reboot your system 'properly' use shutdown/halt/reboot or systemctl command. Simply killing init is not save this days.
Mateusz Marzantowicz
Mateusz Marzantowicz wrote:
On 30.11.2013 00:10, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote:
Mateusz Marzantowicz wrote:
On 29.11.2013 20:41, Frantisek Hanzlik wrote:
On my Fedora 19 i686 I see weird thing - when killing processes (by commands as:
killall -9 kactivitymanagerd killall -9 gam_server killall -9 kded4 killall -9 systemd killall -9 atril
or with PID:
kill -9 1 1322 10612 10619
), then processes stay running - they are not zombies (for PID=1 be zombie perhaps does not make sense), but eat CPU, occupy memory etc. I cannot say this behavior is always (I'm killing processes only when I need it), but I saw this several times, with last Fedora distros.
It is bad glibc signal() implementation or what else?
Regards, Franta Hanzlik
http://unix.stackexchange.com/questions/5642/what-if-kill-9-does-not-work
Mateusz Marzantowicz
Thank for link, but I'm not a lot smarter. Maybe Linux immunize system init (PID 1) against SIGKILL (but I was working on Unices where SIGKILL to init caused clean & immediate system halt - kernel flush buffers, unmount FSs and halt machine), but what SIGKILL to other processes? I was killing them as root, and as I wrote before, they was not zombies and possibly nor in uninterruptible sleep - 'top' utility shows as they consumes eg. several or several tens percents CPU. Then, according to Your link, is only other possibility bad Linux kernel?
Does it happen always regardless system load and ongoing IO operations? It was mentioned in that article that the result of kill -9 might not be immediate depending on what is occupying your kernel.
Please also note, that you can't kill systemd (PID 1) on Linux because it's init process and it doesn't have much sense. To reboot your system 'properly' use shutdown/halt/reboot or systemctl command. Simply killing init is not save this days.
Mateusz Marzantowicz
Last time I did 'kill -9' was when I had freezed GUI, but it was possible remotely ssh'd to this machine and working on it. I tried kill some processes in hope that I can finish programs running in X. IMO on these Unices 'kill -9 1' was acting as 'halt -f' - when its man page is correct, it say: " Force immediate halt, power-off, reboot. Don't contact the init system. " Franta
-
Franta Hanzlík -
Mateusz Marzantowicz -
poma