+5
−1
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。
It seems that the code responsible for this is in kernel/itimer.c:126: p->signal->real_timer.expires = jiffies + interval; add_timer(&p->signal->real_timer); If you request an interval of, lets say 900 usecs, the interval given by timeval_to_jiffies will be 1. If you request this when we are half-way between two timer ticks, the interval will only give 400 usecs. If we want to guarantee that we never ever give intervals less than requested, the simple solution would be to change that to: p->signal->real_timer.expires = jiffies + interval + 1; This however will produce pathological cases, like having a idle system being requested 1 ms timeouts will give systematically 2 ms timeouts, whereas currently it simply gives a few usecs less than 1 ms. The complex (and more computationally expensive) solution would be to check the gettimeofday time, and compute the correct number of jiffies. This way, if we request a 300 usecs timer 200 usecs inside the timer tick, we can wait just one tick, but not if we are 800 usecs inside the tick. This would also mean that we would have to lock preemption during these computations to avoid races, etc. I've searched the archives but couldn't find this particular issue being discussed before. Attached is a patch to do the simple solution, in case anybody thinks that it should be used. Signed-Off-By:Paulo Marques <pmarques@grupopie.com> Signed-off-by:
Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org> Signed-off-by:
Linus Torvalds <torvalds@osdl.org>
CRA Git | Maintained and supported by SUSTech CRA and CCSE