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 <[email protected]>
CC: Jeff Kirsher <[email protected]>
CC: Jesse Brandeburg <[email protected]>
CC: Shannon Nelson <[email protected]>
CC: Carolyn Wyborny <[email protected]>
CC: Don Skidmore <[email protected]>
CC: Bruce Allan <[email protected]>
CC: John Ronciak <[email protected]>
CC: Mitch Williams <[email protected]>
CC: David S. Miller <[email protected]>
CC: LKML <[email protected]>
CC: [email protected]
---
 drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c 
b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
index 967311b..99d0e6e 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/intel/e1000e/netdev.c
@@ -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 {
-- 
1.8.1.4

Reply via email to