Hi Ihor, On Wed, Jan 29, 2025 at 12:21:43AM +0000, Ihor Solodrai wrote: > Hi Tejun, Andrea. > > I tested a couple of variants of bpf-next + sched_ext source tree, > just sharing the results. Thanks for testing! > > I found a working state: BPF CI pipeline ran successfully twice > (that's 8 build + run of selftests/sched_ext/runner in total). Ok. > > Working state requires most patches between sched_ext/master and > sched_ext/for-6.14-fixes [1], and also the patch > "tools/sched_ext: Receive updates from SCX repo" [2] > > On plain bpf-next the dsp_local_on test fails [3]. > Without the patch [2] there is a build error [4]: missing > SCX_ENUM_INIT definition. We definitely need all the patches in sched_ext/for-6.14-fixes. I think once Tejun sends the PR and we land the for-6.14-fixes upstream we should reach a stable state with the sched_ext selftests. I don't have any other additional pending fix at the moment. > > We probably don't want to enable selftests/sched_ext on BPF CI with > that many "temporary" patches. I suggest to wait until all of this is > merged upstream. Sounds reasonable to me. Tejun? > > You can check the full list of patches here: > https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/pull/332/files > > [1] https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/tj/sched_ext.git/log/?h=for-6.14-fixes > [2] https://lore.kernel.org/all/Z1ucTqJP8IeIXZql@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx/ > [3] https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/actions/runs/13019837022 > [4] https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/actions/runs/13020458479 Thanks, -Andrea
