Re: [PATCH v2 13/15] sched/deadline: Make start_dl_timer callers more robust

[Daniel Bristot de Oliveira]

On 3/13/24 02:24, Joel Fernandes (Google) wrote:
> For whatever reason, if start_dl_timer() returned 0 during replenish (it
> did not start a new timer), then do not marked dl_defer_armed, because
> we never really armed.
> 
> Further, we need to cancel any old timers,
> 
> This is similar to what dl_check_constrained_dl() does.
> 
> Add some guardrails for such situations.
> 
> Signed-off-by: Joel Fernandes (Google) <joel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

Makes sense, added as part of the defer patch.

-- Daniel