| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 2007/11/15-17 [Computer/HW/Drives] UID:48642 Activity:high |
11/15 So if I have a process running in Linux and kill -9 isn't
killing it, and killing its parent process didn't kill it,
and now it's reading as though its parent process is 1,
is there any way to kill it short of rebooting the machine?
\_ Sure, but you dont want to be mucking around in kernel data
strucures. Most practical way is to reboot the machine.
\_ Sure, but you dont want to be mucking around in kernel data
strucures. Most practical way is to reboot the machine.
\_ Ah, good ol' Linux reliability. Just out of curiosity,
what kind of process is this anyway?
\_ This has nothing to do with "Linux reliability"; it has to
do with trying to kill a process that's blocked. The most
common scenario is a disk wait; NFS server goes away or
physical I/O error on hard disk hangs up the process. -tom
\_ I believe some low range of numbers are reserved for
kernel processes only and will not let you kill it with
conventional kill method.
\_ no, you can kill any process with kill signals from the
root user. However, kill is just a signal, and there
are paths (i.e. device wait) where processes are too
wedged to process the signal and die nicely. -ERic
\_ The process in question is referencing a SCSI device.
Is there a way to kill the device wait? -op
\- the singal handler will not send a signal to a
\- the singal dispatcher will not send a signal to a
process in a disk wait. you could try while 1
kill -9 PID or force an umount of the fs ... but
that's all unpredictable. there are some super
hairy things you can do but they are beyond the
scope of the motd and are os dep.
\_ Plug the SCSI device back in. -tom
\_ Never unplugged it. Turned it off and turned it
back on. No love.
\- it might be interesting to see what happens
if you change run levels or unload the
scsi kernel module [rmmod on AssOS].
But as I said earlier, if you dont know
why you are going in a disk wait ... it
could be something obvious like removable
media, netowkring going out etc ... or it
could be unclear [failing disk?] ... that's
what you should be trying to figure out.--psb
\_ Anyway, your fundamental problem is that
your process is waiting on the SCSI device,
and it won't go away untill the SCSI device
unblocks. Look at rescan-scsi-bus or
something. -tom
\- You should try to undnerstand why "kill -9" isnt
killing the process.
\_ Short answer: No. You're waiting on the drive. If your proc is
in locked in 'D' state, you're hosed. Figure out what is wrong
with your drive.
\_ Followup: Rebooted the machine, and now all is well. Will explore
other methods of downing this particular process in case this
arises again. Thanks to all for suggestions and information. -op
\_ Depending on exactly what is going on you may not be able to
kill the proc. At my first job I was 'tape back up guy' among
other things. We had first gen crappy tape drives that often
just stopped responding to commands. Usually power cycling the
tape drive would clear the procs, but very rarely that wasn't
good enough and a full reboot was required. These were Suns.
YMMV, but you may find there is no answer beyond 'reboot'.
\- tape drive device drivers look more like disk device drivers
than tapes looked like disks. --psb
\_ Uhm, ok. Yes. Are you supporting what I said or
disagreeing in some way or ...? --confused |
| 2007/11/15-18 [Politics/Domestic/California] UID:48643 Activity:high |
11/15 So newly minted RON PAUL fans, this is a link from Daily Kos
about some of his extreme positions, he gets a few points from
me for not spouting the usual drivel and having an honest
straight forward persona and not being double gitmo pro
torture, but I really can't vote for the dude:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/15/124912/740
\_ I could, knowing full well that no matter what my vote is,
California will go overwhelmingly for whomever the democratic
candidate is. So the electoral votes will swing that way, I can
vote for Ron with a clean conscience that my 'share' of the
electoral votes will still go to the D's.
-California voter
torture, but I really can't vote for the dude:
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/5/15/124912/740
\_ I could, knowing full well that no matter what my vote is,
California will go overwhelmingly for whomever the democratic
candidate is. So the electoral votes will swing that way, I can
vote for Ron with a clean conscience that my 'share' of the
electoral votes will still go to the D's.
-California voter
\_ Yes, California. The state that gave the world Nixon,
Reagan, and - to some extent - Ford which has a Republican
governor and who elected Pete Wilson to the position.
\_ while the state does have some record of occasionally
electing republicans, I think for the forseeable future
they are solidly democratic.
\_ Ed Meese, George Deukmejian. These are not just some
random Repubs, but they were very powerful Repubs.
I agree that D seems to predominate at the moment, but
to say that CA "occasionally" elects Repubs is
deceiving. Since 1900 CA has had 15 R govs and 4 D govs.
\- and 1stripper: Earl Warren.
The State is changing as the demographics change, but
even now 3 of the last 4 were R.
\_ seriously, come on now, do you think *any* of the R
candidates have the slightest prayer of taking CA's
electoral vote? It would take something bizarre like
one of the D candidates taking all of them out in a
freak murder-suicide in a primary debate.
\_ Who knows? Lately, the R's have been conceding
CA and it's worked. If they campaigned here
instead of just hitting OC up for $$$ then maybe
they'd have a better chance. CA elected *Pete
Wilson*.
\_ I didn't leave the Republican Party, the
Republican Party left me. The GOP is entirely
dominated by religious fanatics who care more
about punishing other people for their bad
behavior than the old Reagan ideal of small
government. If the GOP nominated another western
libertarian, then they could compete in CA again.
But they won't (do they even have one running?).
\_ Duncan Hunter is from CA. He gets no press
seemingly. Calling Reagan a libertarian? I scoff
mightily at that. Mightily indeed. Did Reagan
even reduce the size of gov't? He might have
cut some taxes, but it's spending that
determines the size. Reagan and Bush spent like
crazy. GOP isn't "entirely" dominated by
fundies. They are just a large group that GOP
needs to pay lip service to.
\_ If DailyKos is opposed, then Ron Paul is certainly worth considering
as a serious candidate.
\_ This article means nothing to me. "A vicious, comptemptible racist".
\_ This article means nothing to me. "A vicious, contemptible racist".
It's self-evidently horseshit. |
| 2007/11/15-17 [Uncategorized] UID:48644 Activity:low |
11/15 every single episode of the daily show with john stewart
is online now. how can i ever get bored?
\_ http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=108395&title=prince-charles-scandal
\_ http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=108395 |
| 2007/11/15-17 [Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Others, Politics/Foreign/MiddleEast/Iran, Health/Women] UID:48645 Activity:low |
11/15 Santas warned 'ho ho ho' offensive to women - Yahoo News!
http://www.csua.org/u/k0a
Oh, c'mon! Gee.
\_ MERRY NON-DEMONATIONAL COMPLETELY-SECULAR INOFFENSIVE WINTER EVENT!
\_ "MERRY"? Did I just hear "Marry"? How dare you discriminate
against people who prefer single lives!
\_ Management sincely apologises for any offense and/or distress
and/or suffering our inexcusable and rude use of the "M"-word
may have caused.
\_ That's what the politically-correct "Happy Holidays!" is for.
Sucks. I prefer "Merry Christmas!" even though I'm atheist.
\_ BABY KILLER! Don't you know that "Holiday" is derived from
"Holy Day"?!?@!111 |