On Mon, Jul 16, 2018 at 1:40 PM, Mukesh Ojha <[email protected]> wrote: > Currently, there exists a corner case assuming when there is > only one clocksource e.g RTC, and system failed to go to > suspend mode. While resume rtc_resume() injects the sleeptime > as timekeeping_rtc_skipresume() returned 'false' (default value > of sleeptime_injected) due to which we can see mismatch in > timestamps. > > This issue can also come in a system where more than one > clocksource are present and very first suspend fails. > > Fix this by handling the sleeptime_injected flag properly. > > Success case: > ------------ > {sleeptime_injected=false} > rtc_suspend() => timekeeping_suspend() => timekeeping_resume() => > > (sleeptime injected) > rtc_resume() > > Failure case: > ------------ > {failure in sleep path} {sleeptime_injected=false} > rtc_suspend() => rtc_resume() > > sleeptime injected again which was not required as the suspend failed) > > Originally-by: Thomas Gleixner <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Mukesh Ojha <[email protected]> > --- > Changes in V4: > * Changes as suggested by John > - Changed the variable name from sleeptime_injected to > suspend_timing_needed > - Changed the boolean logic.
Thanks so much for reworking and resending this again! > diff --git a/drivers/rtc/class.c b/drivers/rtc/class.c > index d37588f..ee455cc 100644 > --- a/drivers/rtc/class.c > +++ b/drivers/rtc/class.c > @@ -102,7 +102,7 @@ static int rtc_resume(struct device *dev) > struct timespec64 sleep_time; > int err; > > - if (timekeeping_rtc_skipresume()) > + if (!timekeeping_rtc_skipresume()) Hrm... So I'd have instead inverted the logic *in* timekeeping_rtc_skipresume(), rather then here, but this looks to be close enough and I can fix that bit up. Can you confirm you've validated this version of the patch resolves the issue you reported? thanks -john
