Re: harsher kill than kill -9 ?
On Thu, 12 Jul 2001, David Fuchs wrote:
> The `D' tells you that the process is in an uninterruptible disk wait
> state. This can only be caused by a kernel problem with the i/o
> routines, a filesystem problem, or a device driver problem. There
> really isn't anything you can do but restart the machine to get rid of
> that process unless you're lucky enough to have it return from it's wait
> (not likely).
>
> For some explanation, a problem like this is caused when an
> application tries to read/write from disk, but the i/o call never
> returns, and it doesn't result in a timeout either. `kill -9', as most
> of you know, is used to send SIGKILL to a process. The SIGKILL signal
> can not be blocked, ignored, or handled by an application in any way,
> which means that once your application receives a SIGKILL, it's done
> for. The reason it doesn't work in this situation, however, is that the
> program needs to accept the signal that's trying to be sent first. It
> can't do this while it's waiting to return from it's disk activity.
Ok, thanks.
Seems odd that theres no way of killing a process.. I don't really know
that much about how these things work, but it seems like there should be
some way to just purge everything to do with the process from memory or
something...
Oh well :)
>
Thanks,
-Dan
Reply to: