linux-kernel - [PATCH v9 08/32] timers: Clarify check in forward_timer

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: <20231201092654.34614-9-anna-maria@linutronix.de>
Date:   Fri,  1 Dec 2023 10:26:30 +0100
From:   Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
To:     linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org
Cc:     Peter Zijlstra <peterz@...radead.org>,
        John Stultz <jstultz@...gle.com>,
        Thomas Gleixner <tglx@...utronix.de>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@...gle.com>,
        "Rafael J . Wysocki" <rafael.j.wysocki@...el.com>,
        Arjan van de Ven <arjan@...radead.org>,
        "Paul E . McKenney" <paulmck@...nel.org>,
        Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>,
        Rik van Riel <riel@...riel.com>,
        Steven Rostedt <rostedt@...dmis.org>,
        Sebastian Siewior <bigeasy@...utronix.de>,
        Giovanni Gherdovich <ggherdovich@...e.cz>,
        Lukasz Luba <lukasz.luba@....com>,
        "Gautham R . Shenoy" <gautham.shenoy@....com>,
        Srinivas Pandruvada <srinivas.pandruvada@...el.com>,
        K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@....com>,
        Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
Subject: [PATCH v9 08/32] timers: Clarify check in forward_timer_base()

The current check whether a forward of the timer base is required can be
simplified by using an already existing comparison function which is easier
to read. The related comment is outdated and was not updated when the check
changed in commit 36cd28a4cdd0 ("timers: Lower base clock forwarding
threshold").

Use time_before_eq() for the check and replace the comment by copying the
comment from the same check inside get_next_timer_interrupt(). Move the
precious information of the outdated comment to the proper place in
__run_timers().

No functional change.

Signed-off-by: Anna-Maria Behnsen <anna-maria@...utronix.de>
Reviewed-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frederic@...nel.org>
---
v9: Move precious information of outdated comment to proper place (as
    suggested by Frederic)
---
 kernel/time/timer.c | 11 +++++++----
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/time/timer.c b/kernel/time/timer.c
index 3ca706db1d20..66bac56909ba 100644
--- a/kernel/time/timer.c
+++ b/kernel/time/timer.c
@@ -944,11 +944,10 @@ static inline void forward_timer_base(struct timer_base *base)
 	unsigned long jnow = READ_ONCE(jiffies);
 
 	/*
-	 * No need to forward if we are close enough below jiffies.
-	 * Also while executing timers, base->clk is 1 offset ahead
-	 * of jiffies to avoid endless requeuing to current jiffies.
+	 * Check whether we can forward the base. We can only do that when
+	 * @basej is past base->clk otherwise we might rewind base->clk.
 	 */
-	if ((long)(jnow - base->clk) < 1)
+	if (time_before_eq(jnow, base->clk))
 		return;
 
 	/*
@@ -2015,6 +2014,10 @@ static inline void __run_timers(struct timer_base *base)
 		 */
 		WARN_ON_ONCE(!levels && !base->next_expiry_recalc
 			     && base->timers_pending);
+		/*
+		 * While executing timers, base->clk is set 1 offset ahead of
+		 * jiffies to avoid endless requeuing to current jiffies.
+		 */
 		base->clk++;
 		next_expiry_recalc(base);
 
-- 
2.39.2