On Tue, Mar 17, 2020 at 2:47 AM Kamil Paral <kparal(a)redhat.com> wrote:
I find it a very poor experience to wait 90+ seconds for machine
reboot/shutdown. Much poorer than, say, a crashing desktop application (which we block
on), because that application can be replaced with a different one. System services mostly
can't be replaced, and certainly not by a general user.
I agree. I always force power off in this case, a) in the context of
desktop reboots I'm very strongly biased toward DO IT NOW! ; b) I love
torture testing file systems.
All system services present after installation with one of the
release-blocking package sets must not time out frequently or regularly when they are
being stopped during system reboot/shutdown.
Alternate 1:
'must not timeout when'
Alternate 2:
'must not consistently timeout when'
I think blocking on transient unit timeouts may not be practical even
if desirable. But there remains a problem with all of these: what if
the timeout is 90s and the unit consistently takes 80s to stop? I
think that's no different than 90s and systemd just killing it off.
Some units have 5 minute or even indefinite timeouts set. If the
criterion is hinged on the timeout being reached, then it may often
not be a blocker even if that's the intent.
Alternate 3:
'must not consistently hang for more than 30s when'
I might get on board with 10s being the max.
--
Chris Murphy