On Wed, 13 Feb 2019, Will Deacon wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 08, 2019 at 08:30:25PM +0100, Thomas Gleixner wrote:
> >
> > How is the in kernel ktime_get() correctness guaranteed then?
>
> Luck.
>
> I think we'll have to introduce a dummy dependent stack read into our
> counter accessor so that it's ordered by the smp_rmb(). Example diff
> below, which I'll roll into a proper patch series later on.
Yikes.
> static inline u64 arch_counter_get_cntpct(void)
> {
> + u64 cnt, tmp;
> +
> isb();
> - return arch_timer_reg_read_stable(cntpct_el0);
> + cnt = arch_timer_reg_read_stable(cntpct_el0);
> +
> + /*
> + * This insanity brought to you by speculative, out-of-order system
> + * register reads, sequence locks and Thomas Gleixner.
ROTFL
