+8
−7
+15
−44
+6
−8
+2
−2
Loading
Gitlab 现已全面支持 git over ssh 与 git over https。通过 HTTPS 访问请配置带有 read_repository / write_repository 权限的 Personal access token。通过 SSH 端口访问请使用 22 端口或 13389 端口。如果使用CAS注册了账户但不知道密码,可以自行至设置中更改;如有其他问题,请发邮件至 service@cra.moe 寻求协助。
Roman reported a 3 cpu lockup scenario involving __start_cfs_bandwidth(). The more I look at that code the more I'm convinced its crack, that entire __start_cfs_bandwidth() thing is brain melting, we don't need to cancel a timer before starting it, *hrtimer_start*() will happily remove the timer for you if its still enqueued. Removing that, removes a big part of the problem, no more ugly cancel loop to get stuck in. So now, if I understand things right, the entire reason you have this cfs_b->lock guarded ->timer_active nonsense is to make sure we don't accidentally lose the timer. It appears to me that it should be possible to guarantee that same by unconditionally (re)starting the timer when !queued. Because regardless what hrtimer::function will return, if we beat it to (re)enqueue the timer, it doesn't matter. Now, because hrtimers don't come with any serialization guarantees we must ensure both handler and (re)start loop serialize their access to the hrtimer to avoid both trying to forward the timer at the same time. Update the rt bandwidth timer to match. This effectively reverts: 09dc4ab0 ("sched/fair: Fix tg_set_cfs_bandwidth() deadlock on rq->lock"). Reported-by:Roman Gushchin <klamm@yandex-team.ru> Signed-off-by:
Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org> Reviewed-by:
Ben Segall <bsegall@google.com> Cc: Paul Turner <pjt@google.com> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/20150415095011.804589208@infradead.org Signed-off-by:
Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
CRA Git | Maintained and supported by SUSTech CRA and CCSE