Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

MemorySwapMax=0 shouldn't mean infinity #8363

Closed
htejun opened this issue Mar 5, 2018 · 0 comments
Closed

MemorySwapMax=0 shouldn't mean infinity #8363

htejun opened this issue Mar 5, 2018 · 0 comments
Milestone

Comments

@htejun
Copy link
Contributor

htejun commented Mar 5, 2018

Submission type

  • Bug report

systemd version the issue has been seen with

All versions.

Used distribution

centos7, systemd 234

In case of bug report: Expected behaviour you didn't see

Setting MemorySwapMax=0 should set cgroup knob memory.swap.max to 0.

In case of bug report: Unexpected behaviour you saw

systemd interprets MemorySwapMax=0 as infinity and ends up setting memory.swap.max to max.

In case of bug report: Steps to reproduce the problem

Set MemorySwapMax=0 in any unit and reload it.

yuwata added a commit to yuwata/systemd that referenced this issue Mar 6, 2018
yuwata added a commit to yuwata/systemd that referenced this issue Mar 6, 2018
Also, defines and sets checking functions explicitly.

Fixes systemd#8363.
yuwata added a commit to yuwata/systemd that referenced this issue Mar 6, 2018
Also, defines and sets checking functions explicitly.

Fixes systemd#8363.
@poettering poettering added this to the v239 milestone Mar 8, 2018
yuwata added a commit to yuwata/systemd that referenced this issue Mar 9, 2018
Also, this moves two macros from dbus-util.h to dbus-cgroup.c,
as they are only used in dbus-cgroup.c.

Fixes systemd#8363.
keszybz pushed a commit that referenced this issue Mar 9, 2018
Also, this moves two macros from dbus-util.h to dbus-cgroup.c,
as they are only used in dbus-cgroup.c.

Fixes #8363.
Werkov pushed a commit to Werkov/systemd that referenced this issue Jun 3, 2020
Also, this moves two macros from dbus-util.h to dbus-cgroup.c,
as they are only used in dbus-cgroup.c.

Fixes systemd#8363.

(cherry picked from commit 906bdbf)

[mkoutny: simplify range condition, we don't have 681ae88 ("dbus-cgroup: simplify bus_cgroup_set_property()") v237~157^2]
Werkov pushed a commit to Werkov/systemd that referenced this issue Jun 3, 2020
Also, this moves two macros from dbus-util.h to dbus-cgroup.c,
as they are only used in dbus-cgroup.c.

Fixes systemd#8363.

(cherry picked from commit 906bdbf)

[mkoutny: simplify range condition, we don't have 681ae88 ("dbus-cgroup: simplify bus_cgroup_set_property()") v237~157^2]
Werkov pushed a commit to Werkov/systemd that referenced this issue Jun 24, 2020
Also, this moves two macros from dbus-util.h to dbus-cgroup.c,
as they are only used in dbus-cgroup.c.

Fixes systemd#8363.

(cherry picked from commit 906bdbf)

[mkoutny: simplify range condition, we don't have 681ae88 ("dbus-cgroup: simplify bus_cgroup_set_property()") v237~157^2]
Werkov pushed a commit to Werkov/systemd that referenced this issue Jul 9, 2020
Also, this moves two macros from dbus-util.h to dbus-cgroup.c,
as they are only used in dbus-cgroup.c.

Fixes systemd#8363.

(cherry picked from commit 906bdbf)

[mkoutny: simplify range condition, we don't have 681ae88 ("dbus-cgroup: simplify bus_cgroup_set_property()") v237~157^2]
syuu1228 added a commit to syuu1228/scylla that referenced this issue Dec 11, 2023
It was workaround for systemd/systemd#8363,
but the bug was fixed at
systemd/systemd@906bdbf
and merged from systemd v239-8.
Since we dropped support CentOS7, now we don't need the workaround
anymore.
dgarcia360 pushed a commit to dgarcia360/scylla that referenced this issue Apr 30, 2024
It was workaround for systemd/systemd#8363,
but the bug was fixed at
systemd/systemd@906bdbf
and merged from systemd v239-8.
Since we dropped support CentOS7, now we don't need the workaround
anymore.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Development

No branches or pull requests

3 participants