The jiffies tests in n_tty_receive_overrun() are simplified ratelimiting
(without locking). We could use struct ratelimit_state and the helpers,
but to me, it occurs to be too complex for this use case.
But the code currently tests both if the time passed (the first
time_after()) and if jiffies wrapped around (the second time_after()).
time_is_before_jiffies() takes care of both, provided overrun_time is
initialized at the allocation time.
So switch to time_is_before_jiffies(), the same what ratelimiting does.
Signed-off-by: Jiri Slaby (SUSE) <jirislaby@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/tty/n_tty.c | 3 +--
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
index 7f9fee4cf7cf..c0b23e975877 100644
--- a/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
+++ b/drivers/tty/n_tty.c
@@ -1173,8 +1173,7 @@ static void n_tty_receive_overrun(const struct tty_struct *tty)
struct n_tty_data *ldata = tty->disc_data;
ldata->num_overrun++;
- if (time_after(jiffies, ldata->overrun_time + HZ) ||
- time_after(ldata->overrun_time, jiffies)) {
+ if (time_is_before_jiffies(ldata->overrun_time + HZ)) {
tty_warn(tty, "%d input overrun(s)\n", ldata->num_overrun);
ldata->overrun_time = jiffies;
ldata->num_overrun = 0;
--
2.42.0
