From: David S. Miller <davem@sunset.davemloft.net>
Date: Sun, 25 Feb 2007 06:11:42 +0000 (-0800)
Subject: [TICK] tick-common: Fix one-shot handling in tick_handle_periodic().
X-Git-Url: https://git.karo-electronics.de/?a=commitdiff_plain;h=3494c16676a21e7e53e21b08a0a469a38df6dcfb;p=mv-sheeva.git

[TICK] tick-common: Fix one-shot handling in tick_handle_periodic().

When clockevents_program_event() is given an expire time in the
past, it does not update dev->next_event, so this looping code
would loop forever once the first in-the-past expiration time
was used.

Keep advancing "next" locally to fix this bug.

Acked-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
---

diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-common.c b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
index 4500e347f1b..0986a2bfab4 100644
--- a/kernel/time/tick-common.c
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
@@ -77,6 +77,7 @@ static void tick_periodic(int cpu)
 void tick_handle_periodic(struct clock_event_device *dev)
 {
 	int cpu = smp_processor_id();
+	ktime_t next;
 
 	tick_periodic(cpu);
 
@@ -86,12 +87,12 @@ void tick_handle_periodic(struct clock_event_device *dev)
 	 * Setup the next period for devices, which do not have
 	 * periodic mode:
 	 */
+	next = ktime_add(dev->next_event, tick_period);
 	for (;;) {
-		ktime_t next = ktime_add(dev->next_event, tick_period);
-
 		if (!clockevents_program_event(dev, next, ktime_get()))
 			return;
 		tick_periodic(cpu);
+		next = ktime_add(next, tick_period);
 	}
 }