Skip to content

Conversation

@patersonc
Copy link
Contributor

This PR does the following:

  1. Commit 1: Adds a build for each CIP kernel/arch that enables the preempt_rt configuration fragment
  2. Commit 2: Switches our default testing to only use the CIP reference platforms
  3. Commit 3: Creates a cyclicdeadline test for each build from 1.
  4. Commit 4: Creates a cyclictest test for each build from 1.

All done with heavy (hopefully correct) usage of anchors.

I've marked it as draft as I'd very much like for this PR to be tested before it's merged, as I expect to find lots of issues!
If anyone can guide me on how I can do this I'd appreciate it.

Thanks!

@patersonc patersonc changed the title Add RT enabled builds and tests CIP: Add RT enabled builds and tests Nov 21, 2025
@patersonc patersonc added the staging-skip Don't test automatically on staging.kernelci.org label Nov 27, 2025
The CIP project only supports specific architectures and build
configurations. Give the project complete control over this by not
scheduling standard jobs.

Signed-off-by: Chris Paterson <[email protected]>
The validation tools get confused if we make changes to anchors in
jobs-cip.yaml and not in jobs.yaml if they share the same name.

Avoid the issue by renaming the CIP specific anchors.

Signed-off-by: Chris Paterson <[email protected]>
Also make more use of anchors to slim down the job definitions.

Signed-off-by: Chris Paterson <[email protected]>
Note that there is not a separate branch for RT for SLTS v6.12.

Signed-off-by: Chris Paterson <[email protected]>
Make use of the standard cyclicdeadline definition in jobs.yaml.

Signed-off-by: Chris Paterson <[email protected]>
@patersonc patersonc force-pushed the patersonc/cip-add-rt branch from 5c1ff6a to 37a75a9 Compare November 28, 2025 07:31
@patersonc
Copy link
Contributor Author

Note that this PR is currently based on top of #1382 and shouldn't be merged as-is.

@patersonc patersonc removed the staging-skip Don't test automatically on staging.kernelci.org label Nov 28, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant