From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from smtp.kernel.org (aws-us-west-2-korg-mail-alma10-1.taild15c8.ts.net [100.103.45.18]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.subspace.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6E8533C3F58 for ; Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:02:54 +0000 (UTC) Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 ARC-Seal:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785182575; cv=none; b=mceYMOGI6ElWScXiB03wp4Pwg4ktnaBaUjHgdGOmuPQiy3pcRaRZqYHXh/MtC4t9vQNPNxwVjFMeASwWuXoBCj6AS5OBvBFFjToa/ujKCb1F8fHiP++5gE3naBZPf/1YAKHOZKqCMAkKYwtRgu2jo1v0AFnZjkjs8JpnNF9WgYY= ARC-Message-Signature:i=1; a=rsa-sha256; d=subspace.kernel.org; s=arc-20240116; t=1785182575; c=relaxed/simple; bh=cTNwrvAoJrZzLxe8BUTGNuni7BprgmS7imIk88xAgwg=; h=Date:Message-ID:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject; b=WgZLx8h2vczNle1jEA9qrCCM5Kw/wgCJFIsC0yI3/3METdO6aQwjM3Xy+NFRzruVdv2D6FrzcFT5GI7baNE/eJw7wJA2yr2DsTj0GjCbVl1yoxd8DGi5f/KsInMcPLo/4Pxs8URRj3qQIxbA9JiZnAWdEgzKdCPwEnO6X+FnGug= ARC-Authentication-Results:i=1; smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b=Jd5vIGyj; arc=none smtp.client-ip=100.103.45.18 Authentication-Results: smtp.subspace.kernel.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=kernel.org header.i=@kernel.org header.b="Jd5vIGyj" Received: by smtp.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E27151F000E9; Mon, 27 Jul 2026 20:02:53 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=kernel.org; s=k20260515; t=1785182574; bh=cTNwrvAoJrZzLxe8BUTGNuni7BprgmS7imIk88xAgwg=; h=Date:From:To:Cc:In-Reply-To:References:Subject; b=Jd5vIGyj/PJUINZOwzgSiEVRw0EtBnH6i1effn9ai+RwNBjP1coVNfrOhaxwJjbU3 Wp7V0yFbo9gwIGj41S7u0lyfjYW3OpzTRqAtHH7dFLnJgsywsHdzfH0m/NRJC4DOoD zdSlxv3lyWyr9Nqq/YIhX1PlfVtGRhuY8EM5PUcScFltyWBkWr3t/4Xqe3yknkKRZR BcqDiQF2hri+Rm8XmqF6iz48VF0pphwj6DKFgkCmeeTwK9aoCnu+Qe8o+WRKiutMHV VHMp+2Z5VW+wxiH6wod0D0EioPg/VjkZD8RElld7/itUptOSDzlbmrO+0K1sLFUH8b 0l+6e0vTDVqzg== Date: Mon, 27 Jul 2026 10:02:53 -1000 Message-ID: From: Tejun Heo To: sashiko-bot@kernel.org Cc: sched-ext@lists.linux.dev In-Reply-To: <20260726220016.D958B1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> References: <6649066b805d5660b598f3155c30daac@kernel.org> <048d8cc6b8e9be48ec0e6e431afc75cd@kernel.org> <20260726220016.D958B1F000E9@smtp.kernel.org> Subject: Re: [PATCH sched_ext/for-7.3] tools/sched_ext/include: Regenerate enum_defs.autogen.h Precedence: bulk X-Mailing-List: sched-ext@lists.linux.dev List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Unsubscribe: On Sun, Jul 26, 2026 at 10:00:16PM +0000, sashiko-bot@kernel.org wrote: > [Severity: Medium] > Is the SCX_REENQ_LOCAL_MAX_REPEAT to SCX_REENQ_MAX_REPEAT rename actually > present in this tree? > > Looking at kernel/sched/ext/types.h, the old enum name is still present: The rename is in 7706d6e4f2e3 ("sched_ext: Bound per-task reenqueues and eject the owning scheduler"), the commit right below this one on sched_ext/for-7.3. The review base is missing it. > [Severity: Medium] > Will this cause build failures for BPF schedulers that check for > HAVE_SCX_REENQ_MAX_REPEAT? No. With the above commit in the tree, vmlinux.h carries the renamed enum. Thanks. -- tejun