timekeeping: Let timekeeping_cycles_to_ns() handle both under and overflow

For the case !CONFIG_CLOCKSOURCE_VALIDATE_LAST_CYCLE, forego overflow
protection in the range (mask << 1) < delta <= mask, and interpret it
always as an inconsistency between CPU clock values. That allows
slightly neater code, and it is on a slow path so has no effect on
performance.

Suggested-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Signed-off-by: Adrian Hunter <adrian.hunter@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Thomas Gleixner <tglx@linutronix.de>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20240325064023.2997-19-adrian.hunter@intel.com