timekeeping: Fix cross-timestamp interpolation corner case decision
The cycle_between() helper checks if parameter test is in the open interval (before, after). Colloquially speaking, this also applies to the counter wrap-around special case before > after. get_device_system_crosststamp() currently uses cycle_between() at the first call site to decide whether to interpolate for older counter readings. get_device_system_crosststamp() has the following problem with cycle_between() testing against an open interval: Assume that, by chance, cycles == tk->tkr_mono.cycle_last (in the following, "cycle_last" for brevity). Then, cycle_between() at the first call site, with effective argument values cycle_between(cycle_last, cycles, now), returns false, enabling interpolation. During interpolation, get_device_system_crosststamp() will then call cycle_between() at the second call site (if a history_begin was supplied). The effective argument values are cycle_between(history_begin->cycles, cycles, cycles), since system_counterval.cycles == interval_start == cycles, per the assumption. Due to the test against the open interval, cycle_between() returns false again. This causes get_device_system_crosststamp() to return -EINVAL. This failure should be avoided, since get_device_system_crosststamp() works both when cycles follows cycle_last (no interpolation), and when cycles precedes cycle_last (interpolation). For the case cycles == cycle_last, interpolation is actually unneeded. Fix this by changing cycle_between() into timestamp_in_interval(), which now checks against the closed interval, rather than the open interval. This changes the get_device_system_crosststamp() behavior for three corner cases: 1. Bypass interpolation in the case cycles == tk->tkr_mono.cycle_last, fixing the problem described above. 2. At the first timestamp_in_interval() call site, cycles == now no longer causes failure. 3. At the second timestamp_in_interval() call site, history_begin->cycles == system_counterval.cycles no longer causes failure. adjust_historical_crosststamp() also works for this corner case, where partial_history_cycles == total_history_cycles. These behavioral changes should not cause any problems. Fixes: 2c756feb ("time: Add history to cross timestamp interface supporting slower devices") Signed-off-by: Peter Hilber <peter.hilber@opensynergy.com> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231218073849.35294-3-peter.hilber@opensynergy.com
Showing
Please register or sign in to comment