4.9-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.


From: Matija Glavinic Pecotic <matija.glavinic-pecotic....@nokia.com>

commit 34f41c0316ed52b0b44542491d89278efdaa70e4 upstream.

For e.g. HZ=100, timer being 430 jiffies in the future, and 32 bit
unsigned int, there is an overflow on unsigned int right-hand side
of the expression which results with wrong values being returned.

Type cast the multiplier to 64bit to avoid that issue.

Fixes: 46c8f0b077a8 ("timers: Fix get_next_timer_interrupt() computation")
Signed-off-by: Matija Glavinic Pecotic <matija.glavinic-pecotic....@nokia.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <t...@linutronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Alexander Sverdlin <alexander.sverd...@nokia.com>
Cc: khil...@baylibre.com
Cc: a...@linux-foundation.org
Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/a7900f04-2a21-c9fd-67be-ab334d459...@nokia.com
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gre...@linuxfoundation.org>

 kernel/time/timer.c |    2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/kernel/time/timer.c
+++ b/kernel/time/timer.c
@@ -1536,7 +1536,7 @@ u64 get_next_timer_interrupt(unsigned lo
                base->is_idle = false;
        } else {
                if (!is_max_delta)
-                       expires = basem + (nextevt - basej) * TICK_NSEC;
+                       expires = basem + (u64)(nextevt - basej) * TICK_NSEC;
                 * If we expect to sleep more than a tick, mark the base idle:

Reply via email to