tick/common: Align tick period during sched_timer setup.

Message ID 20230615091830.RxMV2xf_@linutronix.de
State New
Headers
Series tick/common: Align tick period during sched_timer setup. |

Commit Message

Sebastian Andrzej Siewior June 15, 2023, 9:18 a.m. UTC
  From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>

The tick period is aligned very early while the first clock_event_device
is registered. The system runs in periodic mode and switches later to
one-shot mode if possible.

The next wake-up event is programmed based on aligned value
(tick_next_period) but the delta value, that is used to program the
clock_event_device, is computed based on ktime_get().

With the subtracted offset, the devices fires in less than the exacted
time frame. With a large enough offset the system programs the timer for
the next wake-up and the remaining time left is too little to make any
boot progress. The system hangs.

Move the alignment later to the setup of tick_sched timer. At this point
the system switches to oneshot mode and a highres clocksource is
available. It safe to update tick_next_period ktime_get() will now
return accurate (not jiffies based) time.

[bigeasy: Patch description + testing].

Reported-by: Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net>
Reported-by: "Bhatnagar, Rishabh" <risbhat@amazon.com>
Fixes: e9523a0d81899 ("tick/common: Align tick period with the HZ tick.")
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/5a56290d-806e-b9a5-f37c-f21958b5a8c0@grsecurity.net
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/12c6f9a3-d087-b824-0d05-0d18c9bc1bf3@amazon.com
---
 kernel/time/tick-common.c | 11 +----------
 kernel/time/tick-sched.c  | 13 ++++++++++++-
 2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
  

Comments

Mathias Krause June 15, 2023, 11:13 a.m. UTC | #1
On 15.06.23 11:18, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> 
> The tick period is aligned very early while the first clock_event_device
> is registered. The system runs in periodic mode and switches later to
> one-shot mode if possible.
> 
> The next wake-up event is programmed based on aligned value
> (tick_next_period) but the delta value, that is used to program the
> clock_event_device, is computed based on ktime_get().
> 
> With the subtracted offset, the devices fires in less than the exacted
> time frame. With a large enough offset the system programs the timer for
> the next wake-up and the remaining time left is too little to make any
> boot progress. The system hangs.
> 
> Move the alignment later to the setup of tick_sched timer. At this point
> the system switches to oneshot mode and a highres clocksource is
> available. It safe to update tick_next_period ktime_get() will now
> return accurate (not jiffies based) time.
> 
> [bigeasy: Patch description + testing].
> 
> Reported-by: Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net>
> Reported-by: "Bhatnagar, Rishabh" <risbhat@amazon.com>
> Fixes: e9523a0d81899 ("tick/common: Align tick period with the HZ tick.")

Cc: stable, maybe? This commit already ended up in quite a few "stable"
kernels (v6.3.2, v6.2.15, v6.1.28, v5.15.111, v5.10.180 and v5.4.243)
and it might be better to list them explicitly to avoid one of them
getting missed.

> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/5a56290d-806e-b9a5-f37c-f21958b5a8c0@grsecurity.net
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/12c6f9a3-d087-b824-0d05-0d18c9bc1bf3@amazon.com
> ---
>  kernel/time/tick-common.c | 11 +----------
>  kernel/time/tick-sched.c  | 13 ++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-common.c b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> index 65b8658da829e..b85f2f9c32426 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> @@ -218,19 +218,10 @@ static void tick_setup_device(struct tick_device *td,
>  		 * this cpu:
>  		 */
>  		if (tick_do_timer_cpu == TICK_DO_TIMER_BOOT) {
> -			ktime_t next_p;
> -			u32 rem;
>  
>  			tick_do_timer_cpu = cpu;
>  
> -			next_p = ktime_get();
> -			div_u64_rem(next_p, TICK_NSEC, &rem);
> -			if (rem) {
> -				next_p -= rem;
> -				next_p += TICK_NSEC;
> -			}
> -
> -			tick_next_period = next_p;
> +			tick_next_period = ktime_get();
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
>  			/*
>  			 * The boot CPU may be nohz_full, in which case set
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> index 52254679ec489..42c0be3080bde 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> @@ -161,8 +161,19 @@ static ktime_t tick_init_jiffy_update(void)
>  	raw_spin_lock(&jiffies_lock);
>  	write_seqcount_begin(&jiffies_seq);
>  	/* Did we start the jiffies update yet ? */
> -	if (last_jiffies_update == 0)
> +	if (last_jiffies_update == 0) {
> +		u32 rem;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Ensure that the tick is aligned to a multiple of
> +		 * TICK_NSEC.
> +		 */
> +		div_u64_rem(tick_next_period, TICK_NSEC, &rem);
> +		if (rem)
> +			tick_next_period += TICK_NSEC - rem;
> +
>  		last_jiffies_update = tick_next_period;
> +	}
>  	period = last_jiffies_update;
>  	write_seqcount_end(&jiffies_seq);
>  	raw_spin_unlock(&jiffies_lock);

Hah, nice spot. So you implemented what I suggested and it, indeed,
works as expected, thereby:

Tested-by: Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net>

Thanks,
Mathias
  
Richard W.M. Jones June 15, 2023, 12:20 p.m. UTC | #2
On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 11:18:30AM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> 
> The tick period is aligned very early while the first clock_event_device
> is registered. The system runs in periodic mode and switches later to
> one-shot mode if possible.
> 
> The next wake-up event is programmed based on aligned value
> (tick_next_period) but the delta value, that is used to program the
> clock_event_device, is computed based on ktime_get().
> 
> With the subtracted offset, the devices fires in less than the exacted
> time frame. With a large enough offset the system programs the timer for
> the next wake-up and the remaining time left is too little to make any
> boot progress. The system hangs.
> 
> Move the alignment later to the setup of tick_sched timer. At this point
> the system switches to oneshot mode and a highres clocksource is
> available. It safe to update tick_next_period ktime_get() will now
> return accurate (not jiffies based) time.
> 
> [bigeasy: Patch description + testing].
> 
> Reported-by: Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net>
> Reported-by: "Bhatnagar, Rishabh" <risbhat@amazon.com>
> Fixes: e9523a0d81899 ("tick/common: Align tick period with the HZ tick.")
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/5a56290d-806e-b9a5-f37c-f21958b5a8c0@grsecurity.net
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/12c6f9a3-d087-b824-0d05-0d18c9bc1bf3@amazon.com

Tested-by: Richard W.M. Jones <rjones@redhat.com>

... fixing this bug which we thought originally was in qemu, then in
an unrelated kernel commit:

https://gitlab.com/qemu-project/qemu/-/issues/1696
https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230613134105.GA10301@redhat.com/

Rich.

>  kernel/time/tick-common.c | 11 +----------
>  kernel/time/tick-sched.c  | 13 ++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-common.c b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> index 65b8658da829e..b85f2f9c32426 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> @@ -218,19 +218,10 @@ static void tick_setup_device(struct tick_device *td,
>  		 * this cpu:
>  		 */
>  		if (tick_do_timer_cpu == TICK_DO_TIMER_BOOT) {
> -			ktime_t next_p;
> -			u32 rem;
>  
>  			tick_do_timer_cpu = cpu;
>  
> -			next_p = ktime_get();
> -			div_u64_rem(next_p, TICK_NSEC, &rem);
> -			if (rem) {
> -				next_p -= rem;
> -				next_p += TICK_NSEC;
> -			}
> -
> -			tick_next_period = next_p;
> +			tick_next_period = ktime_get();
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
>  			/*
>  			 * The boot CPU may be nohz_full, in which case set
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> index 52254679ec489..42c0be3080bde 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> @@ -161,8 +161,19 @@ static ktime_t tick_init_jiffy_update(void)
>  	raw_spin_lock(&jiffies_lock);
>  	write_seqcount_begin(&jiffies_seq);
>  	/* Did we start the jiffies update yet ? */
> -	if (last_jiffies_update == 0)
> +	if (last_jiffies_update == 0) {
> +		u32 rem;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Ensure that the tick is aligned to a multiple of
> +		 * TICK_NSEC.
> +		 */
> +		div_u64_rem(tick_next_period, TICK_NSEC, &rem);
> +		if (rem)
> +			tick_next_period += TICK_NSEC - rem;
> +
>  		last_jiffies_update = tick_next_period;
> +	}
>  	period = last_jiffies_update;
>  	write_seqcount_end(&jiffies_seq);
>  	raw_spin_unlock(&jiffies_lock);
> -- 
> 2.40.1
  
Luiz Capitulino June 15, 2023, 2:15 p.m. UTC | #3
On 2023-06-15 05:18, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:

> 
> 
> 
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> 
> The tick period is aligned very early while the first clock_event_device
> is registered. The system runs in periodic mode and switches later to
> one-shot mode if possible.
> 
> The next wake-up event is programmed based on aligned value
> (tick_next_period) but the delta value, that is used to program the
> clock_event_device, is computed based on ktime_get().
> 
> With the subtracted offset, the devices fires in less than the exacted
> time frame. With a large enough offset the system programs the timer for
> the next wake-up and the remaining time left is too little to make any
> boot progress. The system hangs.
> 
> Move the alignment later to the setup of tick_sched timer. At this point
> the system switches to oneshot mode and a highres clocksource is
> available. It safe to update tick_next_period ktime_get() will now
> return accurate (not jiffies based) time.
> 
> [bigeasy: Patch description + testing].
> 
> Reported-by: Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net>
> Reported-by: "Bhatnagar, Rishabh" <risbhat@amazon.com>
> Fixes: e9523a0d81899 ("tick/common: Align tick period with the HZ tick.")
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/5a56290d-806e-b9a5-f37c-f21958b5a8c0@grsecurity.net
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/12c6f9a3-d087-b824-0d05-0d18c9bc1bf3@amazon.com


I've tested this against 5.10.184 (which is where it reproduces quick
for me):

Tested-by: Luiz Capitulino <luizcap@amazon.com>

> ---
>   kernel/time/tick-common.c | 11 +----------
>   kernel/time/tick-sched.c  | 13 ++++++++++++-
>   2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-common.c b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> index 65b8658da829e..b85f2f9c32426 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> @@ -218,19 +218,10 @@ static void tick_setup_device(struct tick_device *td,
>                   * this cpu:
>                   */
>                  if (tick_do_timer_cpu == TICK_DO_TIMER_BOOT) {
> -                       ktime_t next_p;
> -                       u32 rem;
> 
>                          tick_do_timer_cpu = cpu;
> 
> -                       next_p = ktime_get();
> -                       div_u64_rem(next_p, TICK_NSEC, &rem);
> -                       if (rem) {
> -                               next_p -= rem;
> -                               next_p += TICK_NSEC;
> -                       }
> -
> -                       tick_next_period = next_p;
> +                       tick_next_period = ktime_get();
>   #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
>                          /*
>                           * The boot CPU may be nohz_full, in which case set
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> index 52254679ec489..42c0be3080bde 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> @@ -161,8 +161,19 @@ static ktime_t tick_init_jiffy_update(void)
>          raw_spin_lock(&jiffies_lock);
>          write_seqcount_begin(&jiffies_seq);
>          /* Did we start the jiffies update yet ? */
> -       if (last_jiffies_update == 0)
> +       if (last_jiffies_update == 0) {
> +               u32 rem;
> +
> +               /*
> +                * Ensure that the tick is aligned to a multiple of
> +                * TICK_NSEC.
> +                */
> +               div_u64_rem(tick_next_period, TICK_NSEC, &rem);
> +               if (rem)
> +                       tick_next_period += TICK_NSEC - rem;
> +
>                  last_jiffies_update = tick_next_period;
> +       }
>          period = last_jiffies_update;
>          write_seqcount_end(&jiffies_seq);
>          raw_spin_unlock(&jiffies_lock);
> --
> 2.40.1
>
  
SeongJae Park June 15, 2023, 4 p.m. UTC | #4
On Thu, 15 Jun 2023 11:18:30 +0200 Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de> wrote:

> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> 
> The tick period is aligned very early while the first clock_event_device
> is registered. The system runs in periodic mode and switches later to
> one-shot mode if possible.
> 
> The next wake-up event is programmed based on aligned value
> (tick_next_period) but the delta value, that is used to program the
> clock_event_device, is computed based on ktime_get().
> 
> With the subtracted offset, the devices fires in less than the exacted
> time frame. With a large enough offset the system programs the timer for
> the next wake-up and the remaining time left is too little to make any
> boot progress. The system hangs.
> 
> Move the alignment later to the setup of tick_sched timer. At this point
> the system switches to oneshot mode and a highres clocksource is
> available. It safe to update tick_next_period ktime_get() will now
> return accurate (not jiffies based) time.
> 
> [bigeasy: Patch description + testing].
> 
> Reported-by: Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net>
> Reported-by: "Bhatnagar, Rishabh" <risbhat@amazon.com>
> Fixes: e9523a0d81899 ("tick/common: Align tick period with the HZ tick.")
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/5a56290d-806e-b9a5-f37c-f21958b5a8c0@grsecurity.net
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/12c6f9a3-d087-b824-0d05-0d18c9bc1bf3@amazon.com

I guess adding 'Cc: stable@' might further help stable maintainers?

I also left one very tirival cosmetic comment below, but I dont think those
could be blockers.

Acked-by: SeongJae Park <sj@kernel.org>


Thanks,
SJ

> ---
>  kernel/time/tick-common.c | 11 +----------
>  kernel/time/tick-sched.c  | 13 ++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-common.c b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> index 65b8658da829e..b85f2f9c32426 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
> @@ -218,19 +218,10 @@ static void tick_setup_device(struct tick_device *td,
>  		 * this cpu:
>  		 */
>  		if (tick_do_timer_cpu == TICK_DO_TIMER_BOOT) {
> -			ktime_t next_p;
> -			u32 rem;
>  

Nit: I guess we'd like to remove above one blank line together?

>  			tick_do_timer_cpu = cpu;
>  
> -			next_p = ktime_get();
> -			div_u64_rem(next_p, TICK_NSEC, &rem);
> -			if (rem) {
> -				next_p -= rem;
> -				next_p += TICK_NSEC;
> -			}
> -
> -			tick_next_period = next_p;
> +			tick_next_period = ktime_get();
>  #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
>  			/*
>  			 * The boot CPU may be nohz_full, in which case set
> diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> index 52254679ec489..42c0be3080bde 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
> @@ -161,8 +161,19 @@ static ktime_t tick_init_jiffy_update(void)
>  	raw_spin_lock(&jiffies_lock);
>  	write_seqcount_begin(&jiffies_seq);
>  	/* Did we start the jiffies update yet ? */
> -	if (last_jiffies_update == 0)
> +	if (last_jiffies_update == 0) {
> +		u32 rem;
> +
> +		/*
> +		 * Ensure that the tick is aligned to a multiple of
> +		 * TICK_NSEC.
> +		 */
> +		div_u64_rem(tick_next_period, TICK_NSEC, &rem);
> +		if (rem)
> +			tick_next_period += TICK_NSEC - rem;
> +
>  		last_jiffies_update = tick_next_period;
> +	}
>  	period = last_jiffies_update;
>  	write_seqcount_end(&jiffies_seq);
>  	raw_spin_unlock(&jiffies_lock);
> -- 
> 2.40.1
  
Greg KH June 19, 2023, 6:18 a.m. UTC | #5
On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 11:18:30AM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> 
> The tick period is aligned very early while the first clock_event_device
> is registered. The system runs in periodic mode and switches later to
> one-shot mode if possible.
> 
> The next wake-up event is programmed based on aligned value
> (tick_next_period) but the delta value, that is used to program the
> clock_event_device, is computed based on ktime_get().
> 
> With the subtracted offset, the devices fires in less than the exacted
> time frame. With a large enough offset the system programs the timer for
> the next wake-up and the remaining time left is too little to make any
> boot progress. The system hangs.
> 
> Move the alignment later to the setup of tick_sched timer. At this point
> the system switches to oneshot mode and a highres clocksource is
> available. It safe to update tick_next_period ktime_get() will now
> return accurate (not jiffies based) time.
> 
> [bigeasy: Patch description + testing].
> 
> Reported-by: Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net>
> Reported-by: "Bhatnagar, Rishabh" <risbhat@amazon.com>
> Fixes: e9523a0d81899 ("tick/common: Align tick period with the HZ tick.")
> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/5a56290d-806e-b9a5-f37c-f21958b5a8c0@grsecurity.net
> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/12c6f9a3-d087-b824-0d05-0d18c9bc1bf3@amazon.com
> ---
>  kernel/time/tick-common.c | 11 +----------
>  kernel/time/tick-sched.c  | 13 ++++++++++++-
>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)

What's the status of this fix, I didn't see it in -rc7, am I looking in
the wrong place?

thanks,

greg k-h
  
Mathias Krause June 19, 2023, 7:03 a.m. UTC | #6
On 19.06.23 08:18, Greg KH wrote:
> On Thu, Jun 15, 2023 at 11:18:30AM +0200, Sebastian Andrzej Siewior wrote:
>> From: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>>
>> The tick period is aligned very early while the first clock_event_device
>> is registered. The system runs in periodic mode and switches later to
>> one-shot mode if possible.
>>
>> The next wake-up event is programmed based on aligned value
>> (tick_next_period) but the delta value, that is used to program the
>> clock_event_device, is computed based on ktime_get().
>>
>> With the subtracted offset, the devices fires in less than the exacted
>> time frame. With a large enough offset the system programs the timer for
>> the next wake-up and the remaining time left is too little to make any
>> boot progress. The system hangs.
>>
>> Move the alignment later to the setup of tick_sched timer. At this point
>> the system switches to oneshot mode and a highres clocksource is
>> available. It safe to update tick_next_period ktime_get() will now
>> return accurate (not jiffies based) time.
>>
>> [bigeasy: Patch description + testing].
>>
>> Reported-by: Mathias Krause <minipli@grsecurity.net>
>> Reported-by: "Bhatnagar, Rishabh" <risbhat@amazon.com>
>> Fixes: e9523a0d81899 ("tick/common: Align tick period with the HZ tick.")
>> Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
>> Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/5a56290d-806e-b9a5-f37c-f21958b5a8c0@grsecurity.net
>> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/12c6f9a3-d087-b824-0d05-0d18c9bc1bf3@amazon.com
>> ---
>>  kernel/time/tick-common.c | 11 +----------
>>  kernel/time/tick-sched.c  | 13 ++++++++++++-
>>  2 files changed, 13 insertions(+), 11 deletions(-)
> 
> What's the status of this fix, I didn't see it in -rc7, am I looking in
> the wrong place?

It's in the tip tree since Friday, but yeah, no pull request yet:

https://git.kernel.org/tip/13bb06f8dd42

Thanks,
Mathias
  

Patch

diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-common.c b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
index 65b8658da829e..b85f2f9c32426 100644
--- a/kernel/time/tick-common.c
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-common.c
@@ -218,19 +218,10 @@  static void tick_setup_device(struct tick_device *td,
 		 * this cpu:
 		 */
 		if (tick_do_timer_cpu == TICK_DO_TIMER_BOOT) {
-			ktime_t next_p;
-			u32 rem;
 
 			tick_do_timer_cpu = cpu;
 
-			next_p = ktime_get();
-			div_u64_rem(next_p, TICK_NSEC, &rem);
-			if (rem) {
-				next_p -= rem;
-				next_p += TICK_NSEC;
-			}
-
-			tick_next_period = next_p;
+			tick_next_period = ktime_get();
 #ifdef CONFIG_NO_HZ_FULL
 			/*
 			 * The boot CPU may be nohz_full, in which case set
diff --git a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
index 52254679ec489..42c0be3080bde 100644
--- a/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
+++ b/kernel/time/tick-sched.c
@@ -161,8 +161,19 @@  static ktime_t tick_init_jiffy_update(void)
 	raw_spin_lock(&jiffies_lock);
 	write_seqcount_begin(&jiffies_seq);
 	/* Did we start the jiffies update yet ? */
-	if (last_jiffies_update == 0)
+	if (last_jiffies_update == 0) {
+		u32 rem;
+
+		/*
+		 * Ensure that the tick is aligned to a multiple of
+		 * TICK_NSEC.
+		 */
+		div_u64_rem(tick_next_period, TICK_NSEC, &rem);
+		if (rem)
+			tick_next_period += TICK_NSEC - rem;
+
 		last_jiffies_update = tick_next_period;
+	}
 	period = last_jiffies_update;
 	write_seqcount_end(&jiffies_seq);
 	raw_spin_unlock(&jiffies_lock);