[PATCH v2 2/7] sched/fair: Only set slice protection at pick time

From: Peter Zijlstra

Date: Thu Feb 19 2026 - 03:11:05 EST


We should not (re)set slice protection in the sched_change pattern
which calls put_prev_task() / set_next_task().

Fixes: 63304558ba5d ("sched/eevdf: Curb wakeup-preemption")
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Vincent Guittot <vincent.guittot@xxxxxxxxxx>
Tested-by: K Prateek Nayak <kprateek.nayak@xxxxxxx>
Tested-by: Shubhang Kaushik <shubhang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
---
kernel/sched/fair.c | 11 ++++++-----
1 file changed, 6 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-)

--- a/kernel/sched/fair.c
+++ b/kernel/sched/fair.c
@@ -5444,7 +5444,7 @@ dequeue_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, st
}

static void
-set_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se)
+set_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, struct sched_entity *se, bool first)
{
clear_buddies(cfs_rq, se);

@@ -5459,7 +5459,8 @@ set_next_entity(struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq, s
__dequeue_entity(cfs_rq, se);
update_load_avg(cfs_rq, se, UPDATE_TG);

- set_protect_slice(cfs_rq, se);
+ if (first)
+ set_protect_slice(cfs_rq, se);
}

update_stats_curr_start(cfs_rq, se);
@@ -8977,13 +8978,13 @@ pick_next_task_fair(struct rq *rq, struc
pse = parent_entity(pse);
}
if (se_depth >= pse_depth) {
- set_next_entity(cfs_rq_of(se), se);
+ set_next_entity(cfs_rq_of(se), se, true);
se = parent_entity(se);
}
}

put_prev_entity(cfs_rq, pse);
- set_next_entity(cfs_rq, se);
+ set_next_entity(cfs_rq, se, true);

__set_next_task_fair(rq, p, true);
}
@@ -13597,7 +13598,7 @@ static void set_next_task_fair(struct rq
for_each_sched_entity(se) {
struct cfs_rq *cfs_rq = cfs_rq_of(se);

- set_next_entity(cfs_rq, se);
+ set_next_entity(cfs_rq, se, first);
/* ensure bandwidth has been allocated on our new cfs_rq */
account_cfs_rq_runtime(cfs_rq, 0);
}