@@ -98,18 +98,19 @@ static void tick_periodic(int cpu)
void tick_handle_periodic(struct clock_event_device *dev)
{
int cpu = smp_processor_id();
- ktime_t next;
+ ktime_t next = dev->next_event;
tick_periodic(cpu);
if (dev->mode != CLOCK_EVT_MODE_ONESHOT)
return;
- /*
- * Setup the next period for devices, which do not have
- * periodic mode:
- */
- next = ktime_add(dev->next_event, tick_period);
for (;;) {
+ /*
+ * Setup the next period for devices, which do not have
+ * periodic mode:
+ */
+ next = ktime_add(next, tick_period);
+
if (!clockevents_program_event(dev, next, false))
return;
/*
@@ -123,7 +124,6 @@ void tick_handle_periodic(struct clock_event_device *dev)
*/
if (timekeeping_valid_for_hres())
tick_periodic(cpu);
- next = ktime_add(next, tick_period);
}
}
tick_handle_periodic() is calling ktime_add() at two places, first before the infinite loop and then at the end of infinite loop. We can rearrange code a bit to fix code duplication here. It looks quite simple and shouldn't break anything, I guess :) Signed-off-by: Viresh Kumar <viresh.kumar@linaro.org> --- kernel/time/tick-common.c | 14 +++++++------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)