e1000e: e1000e_cyclecounter_read(): fix er32(SYSTIML) overflow check
If two consecutive reads of the counter are the same, it is also not an overflow. "systimel_1 < systimel_2" should be "systimel_1 <= systimel_2". Before the patch, we could perform an *erroneous* correction: Let's say that systimel_1 == systimel_2 == 0xffffffff. "systimel_1 < systimel_2" is false, we think it's an overflow, we read "systimeh = er32(SYSTIMH)" which meanwhile had incremented, and use "(systimeh << 32) + systimel_2" value which is 2^32 too large. Signed-off-by: Denys Vlasenko <dvlasenk@redhat.com> CC: intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org Tested-by: Aaron Brown <aaron.f.brown@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Jeff Kirsher <jeffrey.t.kirsher@intel.com>
This commit is contained in:
parent
fb5277f2c2
commit
a07fd74d5e
|
@ -4287,7 +4287,7 @@ static cycle_t e1000e_cyclecounter_read(const struct cyclecounter *cc)
|
|||
systimeh = er32(SYSTIMH);
|
||||
systimel_2 = er32(SYSTIML);
|
||||
/* Check for overflow. If there was no overflow, use the values */
|
||||
if (systimel_1 < systimel_2) {
|
||||
if (systimel_1 <= systimel_2) {
|
||||
systim = (cycle_t)systimel_1;
|
||||
systim |= (cycle_t)systimeh << 32;
|
||||
} else {
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue