There are 3 sites using set_next_buddy() and only one is conditional
on NEXT_BUDDY, the other two sites are unconditional; to note:
- yield_to_task()
- cgroup dequeue / pick optimization
However, having NEXT_BUDDY control both the wakeup-preemption and the
picking side of things means its near useless.
Fixes:
147f3efaa241 ("sched/fair: Implement an EEVDF-like scheduling policy")
Signed-off-by: Peter Zijlstra (Intel) <peterz@infradead.org>
Link: https://lkml.kernel.org/r/20241129101541.GA33464@noisy.programming.kicks-ass.net
struct sched_entity *se;
/*
- * Enabling NEXT_BUDDY will affect latency but not fairness.
+ * Picking the ->next buddy will affect latency but not fairness.
*/
- if (sched_feat(NEXT_BUDDY) &&
+ if (sched_feat(PICK_BUDDY) &&
cfs_rq->next && entity_eligible(cfs_rq, cfs_rq->next)) {
/* ->next will never be delayed */
SCHED_WARN_ON(cfs_rq->next->sched_delayed);
*/
SCHED_FEAT(NEXT_BUDDY, false)
+/*
+ * Allow completely ignoring cfs_rq->next; which can be set from various
+ * places:
+ * - NEXT_BUDDY (wakeup preemption)
+ * - yield_to_task()
+ * - cgroup dequeue / pick
+ */
+SCHED_FEAT(PICK_BUDDY, true)
+
/*
* Consider buddies to be cache hot, decreases the likeliness of a
* cache buddy being migrated away, increases cache locality.