Bug 1493069

Summary: [IBM] Review/update sysctl.conf.s390 default values
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 7 Reporter: David Kaspar // Dee'Kej <deekej>
Component: initscriptsAssignee: David Kaspar // Dee'Kej <deekej>
Status: CLOSED ERRATA QA Contact: Daniel Rusek <drusek>
Severity: high Docs Contact: Marie Hornickova <mdolezel>
Priority: high    
Version: 7.4CC: bugproxy, chaithco, deekej, dhorak, drusek, hannsj_uhl, herrold, initscripts-maint-list, jkachuck, ovasik
Target Milestone: rcKeywords: DevelBlocker, EasyFix, HardwareEnablement, Patch
Target Release: 7.6   
Hardware: s390   
OS: Linux   
Whiteboard:
Fixed In Version: initscripts-9.49.42-1.el7 Doc Type: Release Note
Doc Text:
`kernel.shmmax` and `kernel.shmall` updated to kernel defaults on IBM Z Previously, applications that required a large amount of memory in some cases terminated unexpectedly due to low values of the `kernel.shmmax` and `kernel.shmall` parameters on IBM Z. This update aligns the values of `kernel.shmmax` and `kernel.shmall` with kernel defaults, which helps avoid the described crashes.
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
: 1493072 (view as bug list) Environment:
Last Closed: 2018-10-30 10:15:57 UTC Type: Bug
Regression: --- Mount Type: ---
Documentation: --- CRM:
Verified Versions: Category: ---
oVirt Team: --- RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: --- Target Upstream Version:
Embargoed:
Bug Depends On:    
Bug Blocks: 1420851, 1465901, 1466365, 1493072, 1507957, 1513404, 1549617, 1549689, 1609081    

Description David Kaspar // Dee'Kej 2017-09-19 10:01:52 UTC
Previously, Red Hat has updated the default values in
/usr/lib/sysctl.d/00-systen.conf for architectures other than s390.

Few months ago, we received a BZ report #1458916, that the default values for s390 were kept as they were before, and which are too low for some applications to run correctly.

Therefore, I would like to hereby ask IBM representatives, what should be correct default values on IBM's s390 (and s390x if needed) architectures for these settigs?

----------------------------------

# Kernel sysctl configuration file
#
# For binary values, 0 is disabled, 1 is enabled.  See sysctl(8) and
# sysctl.conf(5) for more details.

# Controls the use of TCP syncookies
net.ipv4.tcp_syncookies = 1

# Do not spend as much process time too early to write out dirty pages
vm.dirty_ratio = 40

# Increase the average time a process runs continuously and also improve the
# cache utilization and server style workload throughput at minor latency cost
kernel.sched_min_granularity_ns = 10000000
kernel.sched_wakeup_granularity_ns = 15000000
kernel.sched_tunable_scaling = 0
kernel.sched_latency_ns = 80000000

# Controls the maximum shared segment size, in bytes
kernel.shmmax = 4294967295

# Controls the maximum number of shared memory segments, in pages
kernel.shmall = 268435456

----------------------------------

(https://github.com/fedora-sysv/initscripts/blob/rhel7-branch/sysctl.conf.s390)

----------------------------------

Would IBM be okay with completely removing all of these settings, and using default kernel values?

Would the current config (used for all other architectures) https://github.com/fedora-sysv/initscripts/blob/rhel7-branch/sysctl.conf be sufficient for the needs of IBM s390 (and s390x) arch?

Thank you in advance!

----------------------------------

@dhorak: Please, forward this request to IBM. Quick response from IBM is welcomed.

Comment 5 IBM Bug Proxy 2017-11-29 15:15:46 UTC
------- Comment From epasch.com 2017-11-29 09:48 EDT-------
The kernel.shmmax and kernel.shmall = 268435456
can be removed. The same reason as given for the general file at

https://github.com/fedora-sysv/initscripts/commit/e3784a1aefb3f38a5a3f9ae69b3feff9c8ef5610#diff-5e6436c816034c6fd3829b55f323caad

applies here as well. It doesn't make sense to set the defaults twice.

Comment 6 David Kaspar // Dee'Kej 2018-04-27 13:24:34 UTC
Pull-request has been submitted:
https://github.com/fedora-sysv/initscripts/pull/182

Comment 7 David Kaspar // Dee'Kej 2018-04-27 13:27:40 UTC
*** Bug 1458916 has been marked as a duplicate of this bug. ***

Comment 20 errata-xmlrpc 2018-10-30 10:15:57 UTC
Since the problem described in this bug report should be
resolved in a recent advisory, it has been closed with a
resolution of ERRATA.

For information on the advisory, and where to find the updated
files, follow the link below.

If the solution does not work for you, open a new bug report.

https://access.redhat.com/errata/RHBA-2018:3131