[PATCH 6.8 050/715] timekeeping: Fix cross-timestamp interpolation corner case decision

Sasha Levin
2024-03-24T22:35:49Z

From: Peter Hilber <peter.hilber@opensynergy.com>

[ Upstream commit 87a41130881995f82f7adbafbfeddaebfb35f0ef ]

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: 2c756feb18d9 ("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
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org>
---
kernel/time/timekeeping.c | 18 ++++++++++--------
1 file changed, 10 insertions(+), 8 deletions(-)

diff --git a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
index 8f35455b62509..4e9f2f88c9d6e 100644
--- a/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
+++ b/kernel/time/timekeeping.c
@@ -1180,13 +1180,15 @@ static int adjust_historical_crosststamp(struct system_time_snapshot *history,
}

/*
- * cycle_between - true if test occurs chronologically between before and after
+ * timestamp_in_interval - true if ts is chronologically in [start, end]
+ *
+ * True if ts occurs chronologically at or after start, and before or at end.
*/
-static bool cycle_between(u64 before, u64 test, u64 after)
+static bool timestamp_in_interval(u64 start, u64 end, u64 ts)
{
- if (test > before && test < after)
+ if (ts >= start && ts <= end)
return true;
- if (before > after && (test > before || test < after))
+ if (start > end && (ts >= start || ts <= end))
return true;
return false;
}
@@ -1246,7 +1248,7 @@ int get_device_system_crosststamp(int (*get_time_fn)
*/
now = tk_clock_read(&tk->tkr_mono);
interval_start = tk->tkr_mono.cycle_last;
- if (!cycle_between(interval_start, cycles, now)) {
+ if (!timestamp_in_interval(interval_start, now, cycles)) {
clock_was_set_seq = tk->clock_was_set_seq;
cs_was_changed_seq = tk->cs_was_changed_seq;
cycles = interval_start;
@@ -1277,13 +1279,13 @@ int get_device_system_crosststamp(int (*get_time_fn)
bool discontinuity;

/*
- * Check that the counter value occurs after the provided
+ * Check that the counter value is not before the provided
* history reference and that the history doesn't cross a
* clocksource change
*/
if (!history_begin ||
- !cycle_between(history_begin->cycles,
- system_counterval.cycles, cycles) ||
+ !timestamp_in_interval(history_begin->cycles,
+ cycles, system_counterval.cycles) ||
history_begin->cs_was_changed_seq != cs_was_changed_seq)
return -EINVAL;
partial_history_cycles = cycles - system_counterval.cycles;
--
2.43.0