Re: PREEMPT_RT testing on kernelci

On Wed, Feb 12, 2025 at 9:18=E2=80=AFAM Donald Zickus <[email protected]> =
wrote:
>
> 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 =
the
> > > work.
> > >
> > > Since PREEMPT_RT is now available upstream, would it work to compile =
and
> > > enable some of its tests for the supported architectures on Linus' tr=
ee
> > > 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?
>

Two so far.

https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rt-devel/760e34f9-6034-40e0-82a5-ee9becd24438=
@roeck-us.net/
https://lore.kernel.org/linux-rt-devel/d9480845-7e81-46a2-8bbd-bd0ebdbc6a5f=
@roeck-us.net/

Guenter