4.19.94-rt39-rc2 stable review patch.
If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Julien Grall <redacted>

[ Upstream commit 2c8fdbe7ef0ad06c1a326886c5954e117b5657d6 ]

The update to timer->base is protected by the base->cpu_base->lock().
However, hrtimer_grab_expirty_lock() does not access it with the lock.

So it would theorically be possible to have timer->base changed under
our feet. We need to prevent the compiler to refetch timer->base so the
check and the access is performed on the same base.

Other access of timer->base are either done with a lock or protected
with READ_ONCE(). So use READ_ONCE() in hrtimer_grab_expirty_lock().

Signed-off-by: Julien Grall <redacted>
Signed-off-by: Sebastian Andrzej Siewior <bigeasy@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Steven Rostedt (VMware) <rostedt@goodmis.org>
---
 kernel/time/hrtimer.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
index 94d97eae0a46..d6026c170c2d 100644
--- a/kernel/time/hrtimer.c
+++ b/kernel/time/hrtimer.c

@@ -941,7 +941,7 @@ EXPORT_SYMBOL_GPL(hrtimer_forward);
 
 void hrtimer_grab_expiry_lock(const struct hrtimer *timer)
 {
-	struct hrtimer_clock_base *base = timer->base;
+	struct hrtimer_clock_base *base = READ_ONCE(timer->base);
 
 	if (base && base->cpu_base) {
 		spin_lock(&base->cpu_base->softirq_expiry_lock);

-- 
2.24.1