Re: PREEMPT_RT testing on kernelci

On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 10:43=E2=80=AFAM Guenter Roeck <[email protected]> =
wrote:
>
> On Tue, Feb 11, 2025 at 1:05=E2=80=AFAM Sebastian Andrzej Siewior
> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > I remember Daniel Wagner has been asking to include PREEMPT_RT within
> > kernelci. I don't really know what the status here is. Thank you for th=
e
> > work.
> >
> > Since PREEMPT_RT is now available upstream, would it work to compile an=
d
> > enable some of its tests for the supported architectures on Linus' tree
> > and maybe the -next tree? I don't think that happens at the moment, I
> > saw only a few stable-rt trees.
> >
> > If so, should I just open an issue at
> >         https://github.com/kernelci/kernelci-core/issues/new
> >
> > Is there be anything in particular you need help with?
> >
>
> Unrelated to KernelCI - how stable is PREEMPT_RT in practice ? Reason
> for asking is that I enabled it for x86_64 together with lock
> debugging and got an almost immediate "sleeping function called"
> backtrace.

Red Hat has been selling a kernel-rt product for almost a decade now.
It should be fairly stable.  We also enable lock debugging on our
debug version of kernel-rt and I don't recall anyone seeing anything
(though those debug kernels are slow).  We may not have the same
config options set and haven't seen it yet.  Stacktrace?

Cheers,
Don

>
> Thanks,
> Guenter
>