From 521c42990e9d561ed5ed9f501f07639d0512b3c9 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Viresh Kumar Date: Tue, 15 Apr 2014 10:54:37 +0530 Subject: [PATCH] tick-common: Fix wrong check in tick_check_replacement() tick_check_replacement() returns if a replacement of clock_event_device is possible or not. It does this as the first check: if (tick_check_percpu(curdev, newdev, smp_processor_id())) return false; Thats wrong. tick_check_percpu() returns true when the device is useable. Check for false instead. [ tglx: Massaged changelog ] Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar Cc: # v3.11+ Cc: linaro-kernel@lists.linaro.org Cc: fweisbec@gmail.com Cc: Arvind.Chauhan@arm.com Cc: linaro-networking@linaro.org Link: http://lkml.kernel.org/r/486a02efe0246635aaba786e24b42d316438bf3b.1397537987.git.viresh.kumar@linaro.org Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner --- kernel/time/tick-common.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-common.c b/kernel/time/tick-common.c index 015661279b68..0a0608edeb26 100644 --- a/kernel/time/tick-common.c +++ b/kernel/time/tick-common.c @@ -276,7 +276,7 @@ static bool tick_check_preferred(struct clock_event_device *curdev, bool tick_check_replacement(struct clock_event_device *curdev, struct clock_event_device *newdev) { - if (tick_check_percpu(curdev, newdev, smp_processor_id())) + if (!tick_check_percpu(curdev, newdev, smp_processor_id())) return false; return tick_check_preferred(curdev, newdev); -- 2.20.1