The current decision whether a timer can be queued on a remote CPU checks for timer->expiry <= remote_cpu_base.expires_next.
This is too restrictive because a timer with the same expiry time as an existing timer will be enqueued on right-hand size of the existing timer inside the rbtree, i.e. behind the first expiring timer. So its safe to allow enqueuing timers with the same expiry time as the first expiring timer on a remote CPU base. Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Gleixner <[email protected]> --- kernel/time/hrtimer.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c index 90a8aa9a7fa2..e0521d8f247b 100644 --- a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c +++ b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c @@ -168,7 +168,7 @@ hrtimer_check_target(struct hrtimer *timer, struct hrtimer_clock_base *new_base) ktime_t expires; expires = ktime_sub(hrtimer_get_expires(timer), new_base->offset); - return expires <= new_base->cpu_base->expires_next; + return expires < new_base->cpu_base->expires_next; } static inline -- 2.11.0
