4.19.94-rt39-rc2 stable review patch.
If anyone has any objections, please let me know.
------------------
From: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>
[ Upstream commit 2c8fdbe7ef0ad06c1a326886c5954e117b5657d6 ]
The update to timer->base is protected by the base->cpu_base->lock().
However, hrtimer_grab_expirty_lock() does not access it with the lock.
So it would theorically be possible to have timer->base changed under
our feet. We need to prevent the compiler to refetch timer->base so the
check and the access is performed on the same base.
Other access of timer->base are either done with a lock or protected
with READ_ONCE(). So use READ_ONCE() in hrtimer_grab_expirty_lock().
Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <julien.grall@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/time/hrtimer.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
index 94d97eae0a46..d6026c170c2d 100644
--- a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
+++ b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
@@ -941,7 +941,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(hrtimer_forward);
void hrtimer_grab_expiry_lock(const struct hrtimer *timer)
{
- struct hrtimer_clock_base *base = timer->base;
+ struct hrtimer_clock_base *base = READ_ONCE(timer->base);
if (base && base->cpu_base) {
spin_lock(&base->cpu_base->softirq_expiry_lock);
--
2.24.1
