linux-kernel - [PATCH 20/21] timekeeping: Change timekeeping_check_update() to take a tk_read

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <1427945681-29972-21-git-send-email-john.stultz@linaro.org>
Date:	Wed,  1 Apr 2015 20:34:40 -0700
From:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
To:	lkml <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>
Cc:	John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>,
	Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>,
	Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
	Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
	Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>,
	Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Subject: [PATCH 20/21] timekeeping: Change timekeeping_check_update() to take a tk_read_base

Ingo noted there was no reason to pass the timekeeper structure
to timekeeping_check_update(), and the tk_read_base would be fine,
which simplifies the amount of dereferencing to get to values we
care about.

So this patch simply changes the function as suggested.

Cc: Ingo Molnar <mingo@...nel.org>
Cc: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>
Cc: Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>
Cc: Prarit Bhargava <prarit@...hat.com>
Cc: Richard Cochran <richardcochran@...il.com>
Signed-off-by: John Stultz <john.stultz@...aro.org>
---
 kernel/time/timekeeping.c | 10 +++++-----
 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
index fe91e8e..676896e 100644
--- a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
+++ b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
@@ -131,11 +131,11 @@ static int timekeeping_overflow_seen;
 /* last_warning is only modified under the timekeeping lock */
 static long timekeeping_last_warning;
 
-static void timekeeping_check_update(struct timekeeper *tk, cycle_t offset)
+static void timekeeping_check_update(struct tk_read_base *tkr, cycle_t offset)
 {
 
-	cycle_t max_cycles = tk->tkr_mono.clock->max_cycles;
-	const char *name = tk->tkr_mono.clock->name;
+	cycle_t max_cycles = tkr->clock->max_cycles;
+	const char *name = tkr->clock->name;
 
 	if (offset > max_cycles) {
 		printk_deferred("WARNING: timekeeping: Cycle offset (%lld) is larger than allowed by the '%s' clock's max_cycles value (%lld): time overflow danger\n",
@@ -210,7 +210,7 @@ static inline cycle_t timekeeping_get_delta(struct tk_read_base *tkr)
 	return delta;
 }
 #else
-static inline void timekeeping_check_update(struct timekeeper *tk, cycle_t offset)
+static inline void timekeeping_check_update(struct tk_read_base *tkr, cycle_t offset)
 {
 }
 static inline cycle_t timekeeping_get_delta(struct tk_read_base *tkr)
@@ -1794,7 +1794,7 @@ void update_wall_time(void)
 		goto out;
 
 	/* Do some additional sanity checking */
-	timekeeping_check_update(real_tk, offset);
+	timekeeping_check_update(&real_tk->tkr_mono, offset);
 
 	/*
 	 * With NO_HZ we may have to accumulate many cycle_intervals
-- 
1.9.1

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/