3.14-stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------ From: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> commit 03e6bdc5c4d0fc166bfd5d3cf749a5a0c1b5b1bd upstream. In tick_do_update_jiffies64() we are processing ticks only if delta is greater than tick_period. This is what we are supposed to do here and it broke a bit with this patch: commit 47a1b796 (tick/timekeeping: Call update_wall_time outside the jiffies lock) With above patch, we might end up calling update_wall_time() even if delta is found to be smaller that tick_period. Fix this by returning when the delta is less than tick period. [ tglx: Made it a 3 liner and massaged changelog ] Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <[email protected]> Cc: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Cc: John Stultz <[email protected]> Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/80afb18a494b0bd9710975bcc4de134ae323c74f.1397537987.git.viresh.ku...@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <[email protected]> --- kernel/time/tick-sched.c | 3 +++ 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) --- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c @@ -84,6 +84,9 @@ static void tick_do_update_jiffies64(kti /* Keep the tick_next_period variable up to date */ tick_next_period = ktime_add(last_jiffies_update, tick_period); + } else { + write_sequnlock(&jiffies_lock); + return; } write_sequnlock(&jiffies_lock); update_wall_time(); -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/
