3.11.10.9 -stable review patch. If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org
commit 521c42990e9d561ed5ed9f501f07639d0512b3c9 upstream.
tick_check_replacement() returns if a replacement of clock_event_device is possible or not. It does this as the first check:
if (tick_check_percpu(curdev, newdev, smp_processor_id())) return false;
Thats wrong. tick_check_percpu() returns true when the device is useable. Check for false instead.
[ tglx: Massaged changelog ]
Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar viresh.kumar@linaro.org Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org Cc: fweisbec@gmail.com Cc: Arvind.Chauhan@arm.com Cc: linaro-networking@linaro.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/486a02efe0246635aaba786e24b42d316438bf3b.1397537987... Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner tglx@linutronix.de Signed-off-by: Luis Henriques luis.henriques@canonical.com --- kernel/time/tick-common.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-common.c b/kernel/time/tick-common.c index 64522ec..271ce26 100644 --- a/kernel/time/tick-common.c +++ b/kernel/time/tick-common.c @@ -260,7 +260,7 @@ static bool tick_check_preferred(struct clock_event_device *curdev, bool tick_check_replacement(struct clock_event_device *curdev, struct clock_event_device *newdev) { - if (tick_check_percpu(curdev, newdev, smp_processor_id())) + if (!tick_check_percpu(curdev, newdev, smp_processor_id())) return false;
return tick_check_preferred(curdev, newdev);