Re: Request to backport CONFIG_UCLAMP_TASK to 6.12 stable
Hi
On Thu, Jul 17, 2025 at 10:30:51AM -0700, William McVicker wrote:
> On 07/17/2025, Ben Hutchings wrote:
> > On Wed, 2025-07-16 at 13:25 -0700, William McVicker wrote:
> > > On 07/16/2025, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:
> > > > Hi,
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Jul 10, 2025 at 09:39:28AM -0700, William McVicker wrote:
> > > > > Hi,
> > > > >
> > > > > Recently utilization clamping was enabled in the 6.15 experimental kernel via
> > > > > the options UCLAMP_TASK and UCLAMP_TASK_GROUP [1] per the request in [2]. I'd
> > > > > like to request for this change to backported to the ARM64 6.12 stable kernel
> > > > > to allow us to use this feature with a stable kernel for better performance
> > > > > management of VMs on arm64 servers.
> > > > >
> > > > > Please let me know if there are any concerns or additional steps I need to
> > > > > take.
> > > >
> > > > This is a new feature, and at this point of the release preparation
> > > > for trixie it won't be accepted anymore as it is not adding hardware
> > > > support.
> > > >
> > > > That means you likely will need to use later a bpo version for trixie.
> > >
> > > Thanks for the response! Yes, I'm fine with using a bpo kernel version.
> > > Currently we are using the kernel version 6.12.32-1~bpo12+1. Is it possible to
> > > backport the change to the bookworm bpo kernel?
> >
> > As this change was requested too late for trixie, it is not suitable for
> > bookworm-backports. In general, <release-N>-backports can only be used
> > for backports from <release-N+1>.
> >
> > There *are* also <release-N>-backports-sloppy suites which can contain
> > backports from <release-N+2>, but I have never uploaded kernel packages
> > to those and I don't plan to start.
>
> Thanks for the explanation. I see there is already a branch called
> 6.12-backports [1], but it is a bit outdated. Am I able to request for the
> backport to trixie bpo kernel now or do I need to wait until the final
> trixie release?
I suspect there might be some missunderstanding of the situation? The
mentioned branch is in a personal packaing fork and has nothing to do
with backports to the respective branches officially.
As mentioned by Ben, the change you are looking for will likely land
soon after trixie release into trixie-backports, but for bookworm we
do not intent to do 6.12 backports to bookworm-backports-sloppy.
Regards,
Salvatore
Reply to: