On 6/30/25 3:11 PM, Alexei Starovoitov wrote:
On Mon, Jun 30, 2025 at 2:49 PM Ihor Solodrai <ihor.solodrai@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
[...]
The offending commit is only in /master and in /for-next branches,
while /for-next is there for linux-next only.
Alexei, for-next contains offending commit, but does not have Song's
fix. Right now it's the only base branch on BPF CI that uses the temp
patch.
ok. updated /for-next
We do run tests on for-next, so I suppose the patch should remain in
ci/diffs until it's committed into for-next?
It's news to me that we run BPF CI on /for-next.
I thought we only do it on /master and /net.
Currently we have 4 base branches, for which CI runs on push:
* bpf = bpf/master
* bpf-next = bpf-next/master
* bpf-net = bpf-next/net
* for-next = bpf-next/for-next
I added bpf-net and for-next in March, but Manu opened a PR [1] for
that last year, so it looks like we planned to do it a while ago.
The netdev is done via PR from [2] on github side, not managed by KPD.
[1] https://github.com/linux-netdev/testing-bpf-ci/tree/to-test
[2] https://github.com/kernel-patches/vmtest/pull/286
