Re: [PATCH] sched/eevdf: Fix vprot across reweighting
From: K Prateek Nayak
Date: Mon Oct 12 2026 - 00:39:53 EST
Hello Kayra,
On 10/3/2026 5:16 PM, Kayra Cizmeci wrote:
> diff --git a/include/linux/sched.h b/include/linux/sched.h
> index 7b91cae4a59c..bd9e2d119910 100644
> --- a/include/linux/sched.h
> +++ b/include/linux/sched.h
> @@ -584,6 +584,7 @@ struct sched_entity {
> unsigned char on_rq;
> unsigned char sched_delayed;
> unsigned char rel_deadline;
> + unsigned char rel_vprot;
> unsigned char custom_slice;
> /* hole */
>
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/core.c b/kernel/sched/core.c
> index 71d3c948e14a..f1241f572cdc 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/core.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/core.c
> @@ -4638,6 +4638,7 @@ static void __sched_fork(u64 clone_flags, struct task_struct *p)
> p->se.vruntime = 0;
> p->se.vlag = 0;
> p->se.rel_deadline = 0;
> + p->se.rel_vprot = 0;
> INIT_LIST_HEAD(&p->se.group_node);
>
> /* A delayed task cannot be in clone(). */
> diff --git a/kernel/sched/fair.c b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> index b42a0ca2a69e..0bcd3a77aba4 100644
> --- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
> +++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
> @@ -4614,7 +4614,7 @@ dequeue_load_avg(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
> }
>
> static void
> -rescale_entity(struct sched_entity *se, unsigned long weight, bool rel_vprot)
> +rescale_entity(struct sched_entity *se, unsigned long weight)
> {
> long old_weight = se->h_load.weight;
>
> @@ -4712,7 +4712,7 @@ rescale_entity(struct sched_entity *se, unsigned long weight, bool rel_vprot)
> if (se->rel_deadline)
> se->deadline = div64_long(se->deadline * old_weight, weight);
>
> - if (rel_vprot)
> + if (se->rel_vprot)
> se->vprot = div64_long(se->vprot * old_weight, weight);
> }
>
> @@ -4720,7 +4720,6 @@ static void reweight_eevdf(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se,
> unsigned long weight, bool on_rq)
> {
> bool curr = cfs_rq->curr == se;
> - bool rel_vprot = false;
> u64 avruntime = 0;
>
> if (se->h_load.weight == weight)
> @@ -4733,7 +4732,7 @@ static void reweight_eevdf(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se,
> se->rel_deadline = 1;
> if (curr && protect_slice(se)) {
> se->vprot -= avruntime;
> - rel_vprot = true;
> + se->rel_vprot = 1;
> }
>
> cfs_rq->h_nr_queued--;
> @@ -4741,17 +4740,23 @@ static void reweight_eevdf(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se,
> __dequeue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
> }
>
> - rescale_entity(se, weight, rel_vprot);
> + rescale_entity(se, weight);
>
> update_load_set(&se->h_load, weight);
>
> if (on_rq) {
> - if (rel_vprot)
> - se->vprot += avruntime;
> se->deadline += avruntime;
> se->rel_deadline = 0;
> se->vruntime = avruntime - se->vlag;
>
> + if (se->rel_vprot) {
> + se->vprot += avruntime;
> + se->rel_vprot = 0;
> + } else if (curr) {
> + /* Reweighting must not revive expired slice protection. */
> + cancel_protect_slice(se);
This is the only genuine fix I see in this entire patch where
vruntime adjustment will make the tasks protected and we
probably need to cancel it in that case but i don't get why
we need a new se->rel_vprot for that ...
> + }
> +
> if (!curr)
> __enqueue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
> cfs_rq->h_nr_queued++;
> @@ -6297,6 +6302,11 @@ place_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se, int flags)
>
> se->vruntime = vruntime - lag;
>
> + if (se->rel_vprot) {
> + se->vprot += se->vruntime;
> + se->rel_vprot = 0;
> + }
> +
> if (update_zero)
> update_zero_vruntime(cfs_rq, -lag);
>
> @@ -8143,9 +8153,13 @@ static bool __dequeue_task(struct rq *rq, struct task_struct *p, int flags)
>
> dequeue_hierarchy(p, flags);
>
> - if (sched_feat(PLACE_REL_DEADLINE) && !task_sleep) {
> - se->deadline -= se->vruntime;
> - se->rel_deadline = 1;
> + if (!task_sleep) {
> + se->vprot = protect_slice(se) ? se->vprot - se->vruntime : 0;
> + se->rel_vprot = 1;
I'm having a super hard time understanding why we need this.
Protect slice is only required for current entities so why do we
care about it during migration? The set_next_task() during next
selection will override it anyway.
What am I missing?
> + if (sched_feat(PLACE_REL_DEADLINE)) {
> + se->deadline -= se->vruntime;
> + se->rel_deadline = 1;
> + }
> }
> if (se != cfs_rq->curr)
> __dequeue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
--
Thanks and Regards,
Prateek