On Mon, Jan 6, 2020 at 12:11 PM Robbie Harwood <rharwood@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > "John M. Harris Jr" <johnmh@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > On Friday, January 3, 2020 1:51:00 PM MST Robbie Harwood wrote: > >> Robbie Harwood <rharwood@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>> Ben Cotton <bcotton@xxxxxxxxxx> writes: > >>> > >>>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/EnableEarlyoom > >>>> > >>>> == Summary == > >>>> Install earlyoom package, and enable it by default. This will cause > >>>> the kernel oomkiller to trigger sooner, but will not affect which > >>>> process it chooses to kill off. The idea is to recover from out of > >>>> memory situations sooner, rather than the typical complete system hang > >>>> in which the user has no other choice but to force power off. > >>>> > >>>> # enable earlyoom by default on workstation > >>>> enable earlyoom.service > >>>> </pre> > >>> > >>> The OOM killer is a kernel function. I have no opinion on this proposal > >>> as it stands, but I would like it to include an explanation of why this > >>> requires a service in userspace to fix. > >> > >> Another thought. Wouldn't some of the pain here be alleviated by > >> setting vm.swappiness=0? Currently it seems to be 60, which results > >> in somewhat aggressive swap use; 1 seems better (minimal swapping > >> without disabling), while 0 will disable it for general use (while > >> preserving it for hibernation). This would at least improve the disk > >> thrashing during OOM situations. > > > > To clarify, according to the Workstation group, hibernation isn't even > > supported. > > If that's true - and I don't know how I'd check it, so I didn't - we > should revisit enabling swap in the default install, and *definitely* > should remove the warning for not having it from anaconda. It's not correct that the Workstation working group doesn't want to see it supported, it's a question of whether and to what degree it can be supported, and making sure users have expectations proper set. I wouldn't want users thinking it'll work by advertising that it does, and then it eats their data. Does the hardware support it? Does the hardware properly advertise what it does support? What mechanisms are needed in the kernel and systemd to support it, and what to do when there are bugs that break it? It's not practical for the Fedora kernel team to become responsible for supporting it when it breaks, nor is it practical to block the release on such bugs. The most recent topic I found on this: Disabling kernel's hibernate support by default, allow re-enabling it with a kernel cmdline option https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/kernel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/message/TLTA6HAYJWQYHV3ZHFXUIXM4IJVWBEJJ/ As for swap size options including no swap, and maybe swap-on-ZRAM: https://pagure.io/fedora-workstation/issue/120 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1731978 There are all kinds of useful and necessary discussions to have there (rather than here). -- Chris Murphy _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
