Hi Jeffy,
On Mon, Feb 26, 2018 at 6:50 PM, Jeffy Chen <jeffy.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Since accessing a Chrome OS EC based rtc is a slow operation, there is a
> race window where if the alarm is set for the next second and the second
> ticks over right before calculating the alarm offset.
>
> In this case the current driver is setting a 0-second alarm, which would
> be considered as disabling alarms by the EC(EC_RTC_ALARM_CLEAR).
>
> This breaks, e.g., hwclock which relies on RTC_UIE_ON ->
> rtc_update_irq_enable(), which sets a 1-second alarm and expects it to
> fire an interrupt.
>
> So return -ETIME when the alarm is in the past, follow __rtc_set_alarm().
>
> Signed-off-by: Jeffy Chen <jeffy.chen@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Commit message is better. Thanks! And this is exactly what I was
already testing. I still need to get through a bit more testing to
ensure it has resolved all the races I saw, but it's good on several
of them:
Reviewed-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Brian Norris <briannorris@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>
> Changes in v3:
> Fix alarm time comparing.
>
> Changes in v2:
> Rewrite commit message as Brian suggested.
> Check alarm time only when that alarm is enabled.
>
> drivers/rtc/rtc-cros-ec.c | 8 ++++----
> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
>
> diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-cros-ec.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-cros-ec.c
> index f0ea6899c731..bf7ced095c94 100644
> --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-cros-ec.c
> +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-cros-ec.c
> @@ -197,10 +197,10 @@ static int cros_ec_rtc_set_alarm(struct device *dev, struct rtc_wkalrm *alrm)
> cros_ec_rtc->saved_alarm = (u32)alarm_time;
> } else {
> /* Don't set an alarm in the past. */
> - if ((u32)alarm_time < current_time)
> - alarm_offset = EC_RTC_ALARM_CLEAR;
> - else
> - alarm_offset = (u32)alarm_time - current_time;
> + if ((u32)alarm_time <= current_time)
> + return -ETIME;
> +
> + alarm_offset = (u32)alarm_time - current_time;
> }
>
> ret = cros_ec_rtc_set(cros_ec, EC_CMD_RTC_SET_ALARM, alarm_offset);
> --
> 2.11.0
>
>
