В Tue, 10 Feb 2015 22:28:23 +0100 Kai Krakow <hurikha...@gmail.com> пишет:
> Lennart Poettering <lenn...@poettering.net> schrieb: > > > On Tue, 10.02.15 20:16, Kai Krakow (hurikha...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > >> Then the question is: Why or what does try to start a user session in the > >> first place? I don't think KDE does this as it's not there yet (at least > >> in KDE 4.x). And I didn't enable a user@...service (but shouldn't it work > >> then when started from the normal service startups in systemd). > > > > logind maintains one user@.service instance per-user as long as she or > > he is logged in at least once. The service is basically ref-counted by > > the user's session. > > So, be patient with me until I fully understand it... I'm using kdm > (previously lightdm but made no difference) to launch my KDE session. At > some time in the process, the aforementioned messages get logged. As far as > I can tell, logind is involved in this as it actually does spawn my > graphical session. > > That in turn, according to your words, means: A user@.service for me should > be launched (whether I need it or not). > > If this is true, I should see a systemd user instance in "ps axuw", or > simpler: Another systemd process except PID1 should be running. > > So far the outcome is: It doesn't but I instead see those error logs in the > journal. > Well, it fails at spawning it. What is the content of your limits.conf? Did you try to enable pam_limits debugging? > >> I don't consider this a bug, but my main problem with this is I have no > >> idea how to track that down. > > > > Do you have any weird kernel patch applied, something that is supposed > > to improve security or so? > > This is the plain Gentoo kernel 3.18.6 for desktop, nothing special except > BFQ patches (applied by the Gentoo kernel package itself, not manually > patched). I'm pretty sure Gentoo does not apply any special extra patches. > Autogrouping for cgroups (SCHED_AUTOGROUP) is turned on - I'm not sure if it > plays into the issue but from what I read it shouldn't. > > Maybe I should diff my kernel config with one that doesn't show this > behaviour. Do you have one I should compare with? > > >> > This is unrelated. The kernel RT cgroup API is really just awfully > >> > broken, ignore this. > >> > >> Maybe just turn off the RT_FIFO feature in the kernel for the time > >> being? > > > > Nah, just ignore that log msg... > > I meant SCHED_OTHER/RR_FIFO, but I'll ignore that then. > _______________________________________________ systemd-devel mailing list systemd-devel@lists.freedesktop.org http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/systemd-devel
