Created attachment 1939400 [details] sadf -g -- -q PSI -s 08:10:00 > sa_PSI.svg Description of problem: systemd-oomd will occasionally kill my backup script when I send full snapshot (non-incremental) to my backup drive, it also seems to kill unrelated GNOME desktop components? see journalctl attachment. Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable): % oomctl --version systemd 251 (251.10-588.fc37) +PAM +AUDIT +SELINUX -APPARMOR +IMA +SMACK +SECCOMP -GCRYPT +GNUTLS +OPENSSL +ACL +BLKID +CURL +ELFUTILS +FIDO2 +IDN2 -IDN -IPTC +KMOD +LIBCRYPTSETUP +LIBFDISK +PCRE2 +PWQUALITY +P11KIT +QRENCODE +TPM2 +BZIP2 +LZ4 +XZ +ZLIB +ZSTD +BPF_FRAMEWORK +XKBCOMMON +UTMP +SYSVINIT default-hierarchy=unified How reproducible: Mixed; reproducibility seems more consistent when sending full snapshots to backup and actively using my desktop. I have yet to create a perfect reproduction, but am working on it. Steps to Reproduce: 1. Send full snapshot between two disks, either in the user.slice or in the service.slice 1.a btrfs send /big_snapshot | btrfs receive /mnt/some_other_disk I hope to have better reproduction in the future. Actual results: systemd-oomd will kill the systemd service I use for this or kill the offending terminal that is running this command when it's not put into another systemd slice using systemd-run or ran as a service. Expected results: Backups to work without being SIGKILLed Additional info: Backup Drive [btrfs recv]: Model(ST8000DM004) P/N(2CX188) Serial(ZCT07N2M) ___ connected via a Sabrent 3.5" harddrive USB UASP enclosure. It is running using the UAS USB driver, not BOT mass-storage. This appears to be a "device-managed" SMR drive. Googling the serial number appears to confirm this, plus the disk indicates it supports ATA TRIM, but has no zone namespaces. Note this disk is unpowered most of the time, I power it on and it immediately triggers my backups via a udev rule. In terms of how this block device is configured on Linux: USB UAS <-> dm-crypt (LUKS) <-> Btrfs It was suggested to me in #fedora that the speed of writing to this drive may be the culprit for the OOM condition? hard to say, but I have been using this backup system longer than systemd-oomd seemed to have replaced the older facebook/oomd binary. ___ Storage Drive [btrfs send]: ST3000VN007-2E4166_Z73030Z2 ___ This is where the data is coming from. ATA (AHCI) <-> dm-crypt (LUKS) <-> Btrfs ___ Attachments: sa_PSI.svg: is a plot of the following command: `sadf -g -- -q PSI -s 08:10:00 > sa_PSI.svg` unfortunately, the granularity is quite low, I wish I had a 1sec tick on it. When I attempt another backup, I'll make sure to have sar write to another datafile with 1sec intervals. oomd_journalctl.txt output of systemd-oomd since I noticed my backup script getting killed. what I find interesting here is the more recent ones, when I tried to replicate this, I see it killing random GNOME stuff in my user slice. I can confirm whatever it is killing, it's also killing the terminal that is running the sudo btrfs send/recv commands I'm using. sys-backup_journalctl.txt output of logging for this service. PLEASE NOTE, some of the failures were me making tweaks to my script because I noticed my backup failed once for the luks-backup-* uuid being mapped already which confused me. I now believe this occured because oomd killed my script and I didn't notice it til very recently. sys-backup.sh / sys-backup.service how my backups work. If you want the udev rule, I can give that as well? Please ask if you need anything else. In the meantime, I'll try and build a better reproducible example and will likely turn systemd-oomd off for now.
Created attachment 1939401 [details] logs of sys-backup service.
Created attachment 1939402 [details] logs of systemd-oomd
Created attachment 1939403 [details] backup script.
Created attachment 1939404 [details] backup service unit
Sorry, I forgot to mention other hardware details, if relevant: 64GiB memory 4GiB swap (on NVMe)
I have noticed that OOMD kills my Xfce session when building the 6.1.7 kernel from source. Suspect we may have the same problem, but I have only 8 GB of RAM.
This message is a reminder that Fedora Linux 37 is nearing its end of life. Fedora will stop maintaining and issuing updates for Fedora Linux 37 on 2023-12-05. It is Fedora's policy to close all bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a 'version' of '37'. Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, change the 'version' to a later Fedora Linux version. Note that the version field may be hidden. Click the "Show advanced fields" button if you do not see it. Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not able to fix it before Fedora Linux 37 is end of life. If you would still like to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version of Fedora Linux, you are encouraged to change the 'version' to a later version prior to this bug being closed.
Fedora Linux 37 entered end-of-life (EOL) status on 2023-12-05. Fedora Linux 37 is no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug. If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of Fedora Linux please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. Note that the version field may be hidden. Click the "Show advanced fields" button if you do not see the version field. If you are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against an active release. Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.