On Thu, Jul 02, 2020 at 03:21:35PM +0200, Thomas Gleixner wrote: > Frederic Weisbecker <frede...@kernel.org> writes: > > There is no apparent reason for not forwarding base->clk when it's 2 > > jiffies late, except perhaps for past optimizations. But since forwarding > > has to be done at some point now anyway, this doesn't stand anymore. > > > > Signed-off-by: Frederic Weisbecker <frede...@kernel.org> > > Cc: Peter Zijlstra <pet...@infradead.org> > > Cc: Anna-Maria Gleixner <anna-ma...@linutronix.de> > > Cc: Juri Lelli <juri.le...@redhat.com> > > --- > > kernel/time/timer.c | 2 +- > > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > > > diff --git a/kernel/time/timer.c b/kernel/time/timer.c > > index 439fee098e76..25a55c043297 100644 > > --- a/kernel/time/timer.c > > +++ b/kernel/time/timer.c > > @@ -883,7 +883,7 @@ static inline void forward_timer_base(struct timer_base > > *base) > > * Also while executing timers, base->clk is 1 offset ahead > > * of jiffies to avoid endless requeuing to current jffies. > > */ > > - if ((long)(jnow - base->clk) < 2) > > + if ((long)(jnow - base->clk) < 1) > > return; > > The apparent reason is in the comment right above the condition ...
Hmm, that's a comment I added myself in the patch before. The following part: > > * Also while executing timers, base->clk is 1 offset ahead > > * of jiffies to avoid endless requeuing to current jffies. > > */ relates to situation when (long)(jnow - base->clk) < 0
