+4
−4
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。
While working on the new version of the code for SCHED_SPORADIC I noticed something strange in the present throttling mechanism. More specifically in the throttling timer handler in sched_rt.c (do_sched_rt_period_timer()) and in rt_rq_enqueue(). The problem is that, when unthrottling a runqueue, rt_rq_enqueue() only asks for rescheduling if the runqueue has a sched_entity associated to it (i.e., rt_rq->rt_se != NULL). Now, if the runqueue is the root rq (which has a rt_se = NULL) rescheduling does not take place, and it is delayed to some undefined instant in the future. This imply some random bandwidth usage by the RT tasks under throttling. For instance, setting rt_runtime_us/rt_period_us = 950ms/1000ms an RT task will get less than 95%. In our tests we got something varying between 70% to 95%. Using smaller time values, e.g., 95ms/100ms, things are even worse, and I can see values also going down to 20-25%!! The tests we performed are simply running 'yes' as a SCHED_FIFO task, and checking the CPU usage with top, but we can investigate thoroughly if you think it is needed. Things go much better, for us, with the attached patch... Don't know if it is the best approach, but it solved the issue for us. Signed-off-by:Dario Faggioli <raistlin@linux.it> Signed-off-by:
Michael Trimarchi <trimarchimichael@yahoo.it> Acked-by:
Peter Zijlstra <a.p.zijlstra@chello.nl> Cc: <stable@kernel.org> Signed-off-by:
Ingo Molnar <mingo@elte.hu>
CRA Git | Maintained and supported by SUSTech CRA and CCSE