[LTP] [PATCH v11] thermal: add new test group

[LTP] [PATCH v11] thermal: add new test group

[Piotr Kubaj]

Currently consists of only one test for the CPU package thermal sensor
interface for Intel platforms.
It works by checking the initial count of thermal interrupts. Then it
decreases the threshold for sending a thermal interrupt to just above
the current temperature and runs a workload on the CPU. Finally, it
restores the original thermal threshold and checks whether the number
of thermal interrupts increased.

Signed-off-by: Piotr Kubaj <piotr.kubaj@intel.com>
---
Patch version 11
Switched 1 to true and added reference to kernel fix.
---
 runtest/thermal                               |   3 +
 testcases/kernel/Makefile                     |   1 +
 testcases/kernel/thermal/.gitignore           |   1 +
 testcases/kernel/thermal/Makefile             |   9 +
 .../kernel/thermal/thermal_interrupt_events.c | 225 ++++++++++++++++++
 5 files changed, 239 insertions(+)
 create mode 100644 runtest/thermal
 create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/thermal/.gitignore
 create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/thermal/Makefile
 create mode 100644 testcases/kernel/thermal/thermal_interrupt_events.c

diff --git a/runtest/thermal b/runtest/thermal
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..57e3d29f8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/runtest/thermal
@@ -0,0 +1,3 @@
+# Thermal driver API
+# https://docs.kernel.org/driver-api/thermal/
+thermal_interrupt_events thermal_interrupt_events
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/Makefile b/testcases/kernel/Makefile
index 98fd45a9d..ac816e4e8 100644
--- a/testcases/kernel/Makefile
+++ b/testcases/kernel/Makefile
@@ -36,6 +36,7 @@ SUBDIRS			+= connectors \
 			   sched \
 			   security \
 			   sound \
+			   thermal \
 			   tracing \
 			   uevents \
 			   watchqueue \
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/thermal/.gitignore b/testcases/kernel/thermal/.gitignore
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..1090bdad8
--- /dev/null
+++ b/testcases/kernel/thermal/.gitignore
@@ -0,0 +1 @@
+thermal_interrupt_events
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/thermal/Makefile b/testcases/kernel/thermal/Makefile
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..4657c3fb3
--- /dev/null
+++ b/testcases/kernel/thermal/Makefile
@@ -0,0 +1,9 @@
+# SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
+# Copyright (c) 2025, Intel Corporation. All rights reserved.
+# Author:Piotr Kubaj <piotr.kubaj@intel.com>
+
+top_srcdir             ?= ../../..
+
+include $(top_srcdir)/include/mk/testcases.mk
+
+include $(top_srcdir)/include/mk/generic_leaf_target.mk
diff --git a/testcases/kernel/thermal/thermal_interrupt_events.c b/testcases/kernel/thermal/thermal_interrupt_events.c
new file mode 100644
index 000000000..4cfd90095
--- /dev/null
+++ b/testcases/kernel/thermal/thermal_interrupt_events.c
@@ -0,0 +1,225 @@
+// SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0-or-later
+
+/*
+ * Copyright (C) 2026 Intel - http://www.intel.com/
+ */
+
+/*\
+ * Tests the CPU package thermal sensor interface for Intel platforms.
+
+ * Works by checking the initial count of thermal interrupts. Then it
+ * decreases the threshold for sending a thermal interrupt to just above
+ * the current temperature and runs a workload on the CPU. Finally, it restores
+ * the original thermal threshold and checks whether the number of thermal
+ * interrupts increased.
+ */
+
+#include <ctype.h>
+#include "tst_safe_stdio.h"
+#include "tst_test.h"
+#include "tst_timer_test.h"
+
+#define	RUNTIME		30
+#define	SLEEP		10
+#define	TEMP_INCREMENT	10
+
+static bool x86_pkg_temp_tz_found, *x86_pkg_temp_tz;
+static char temp_path[PATH_MAX], trip_path[PATH_MAX];
+static int nproc, temp_high, temp, trip, tz_counter;
+static uint64_t *interrupt_init, *interrupt_later;
+
+static void read_interrupts(uint64_t *interrupts, const int nproc)
+{
+	bool interrupts_found = false;
+	char line[8192];
+
+	memset(interrupts, 0, nproc * sizeof(*interrupts));
+	FILE *fp = SAFE_FOPEN("/proc/interrupts", "r");
+
+	while (fgets(line, sizeof(line), fp)) {
+		if (strstr(line, "Thermal event interrupts")) {
+			interrupts_found = true;
+			char *ptr = strchr(line, ':');
+
+			for (int i = 0; i < nproc; i++) {
+				char *endptr;
+
+				while (*ptr && !isdigit(*ptr))
+					ptr++;
+
+				errno = 0;
+
+				interrupts[i] = strtoull(ptr, &endptr, 10);
+
+				if (ptr == endptr)
+					tst_brk(TBROK, "interrupt not found");
+
+				if (errno == ERANGE)
+					tst_brk(TCONF, "interrupt out of range");
+
+				ptr = endptr;
+				tst_res(TDEBUG, "interrupts[%d]: %ld", i, interrupts[i]);
+			}
+			break;
+		}
+	}
+	SAFE_FCLOSE(fp);
+	if (!interrupts_found)
+		tst_brk(TCONF, "No Thermal event interrupts line in /proc/interrupts");
+}
+
+static void setup(void)
+{
+	char line[8192];
+
+	nproc = tst_ncpus();
+	tst_res(TDEBUG, "Number of logical cores: %d", nproc);
+	interrupt_init = calloc(nproc, sizeof(uint64_t));
+	interrupt_later = calloc(nproc, sizeof(uint64_t));
+
+	DIR *dir = SAFE_OPENDIR("/sys/class/thermal/");
+	struct dirent *entry;
+
+	while ((entry = SAFE_READDIR(dir))) {
+		if ((!strncmp(entry->d_name, "thermal_zone", sizeof("thermal_zone") - 1)))
+			tz_counter++;
+	}
+	SAFE_CLOSEDIR(dir);
+	tst_res(TDEBUG, "Found %d thermal zone(s)", tz_counter);
+
+	read_interrupts(interrupt_init, nproc);
+
+	x86_pkg_temp_tz = calloc(tz_counter, sizeof(bool));
+
+	for (int i = 0; i < tz_counter; i++) {
+		char path[PATH_MAX];
+
+		snprintf(path, PATH_MAX, "/sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone%d/type", i);
+		tst_res(TDEBUG, "Checking whether %s is x86_pkg_temp", path);
+
+		SAFE_FILE_SCANF(path, "%s", line);
+		if (strstr(line, "x86_pkg_temp")) {
+			tst_res(TDEBUG, "Thermal zone %d uses x86_pkg_temp", i);
+			x86_pkg_temp_tz[i] = true;
+			x86_pkg_temp_tz_found = true;
+		}
+	}
+
+	if (!x86_pkg_temp_tz_found)
+		tst_brk(TCONF, "No thermal zone uses x86_pkg_temp");
+}
+
+static void *cpu_workload(double run_time)
+{
+	tst_timer_start(CLOCK_MONOTONIC);
+	int num = 2;
+
+	while (!tst_timer_expired_ms(run_time * 1000)) {
+		for (int i = 2; i * i <= num; i++) {
+			if (num % i == 0)
+				break;
+		}
+		num++;
+		SAFE_FILE_SCANF(temp_path, "%d", &temp);
+
+		if (temp > temp_high)
+			break;
+	}
+	return NULL;
+}
+
+static void test_zone(int i)
+{
+	int sleep_time = SLEEP;
+	double run_time = RUNTIME;
+
+	snprintf(temp_path, PATH_MAX, "/sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone%d/temp", i);
+	tst_res(TINFO, "Testing %s", temp_path);
+	SAFE_FILE_SCANF(temp_path, "%d", &temp);
+	if (temp < 0)
+		tst_brk(TBROK, "Unexpected zone temperature value %d", temp);
+
+	tst_res(TDEBUG, "Current temperature for %s: %d", temp_path, temp);
+
+	temp_high = temp + TEMP_INCREMENT;
+
+	snprintf(trip_path, PATH_MAX, "/sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone%d/trip_point_1_temp", i);
+
+	tst_res(TDEBUG, "Setting new trip_point_1_temp value: %d", temp_high);
+	SAFE_FILE_SCANF(trip_path, "%d", &trip);
+	SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(trip_path, "%d", temp_high);
+
+	while (sleep_time > 0) {
+		tst_res(TDEBUG, "Running for %f seconds, then sleeping for %d seconds", run_time, sleep_time);
+
+		for (int j = 0; j < nproc; j++) {
+			if (!SAFE_FORK()) {
+				cpu_workload(run_time);
+				exit(0);
+			}
+		}
+
+		tst_reap_children();
+
+		SAFE_FILE_SCANF(temp_path, "%d", &temp);
+		tst_res(TDEBUG, "Temperature for %s after a test: %d", temp_path, temp);
+
+		if (temp > temp_high)
+			break;
+		sleep(sleep_time--);
+		run_time -= 3;
+	}
+
+}
+
+static void cleanup(void)
+{
+	if (x86_pkg_temp_tz_found)
+		SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(trip_path, "%d", trip);
+
+	free(x86_pkg_temp_tz);
+	free(interrupt_init);
+	free(interrupt_later);
+}
+
+static void run(void)
+{
+	for (int i = 0; i < tz_counter; i++) {
+		if (x86_pkg_temp_tz[i])
+			test_zone(i);
+	}
+	read_interrupts(interrupt_later, nproc);
+
+	for (int i = 0; i < nproc; i++) {
+		if (interrupt_later[i] < interrupt_init[i])
+			tst_res(TFAIL, "CPU %d interrupt counter: %ld (previous: %ld)",
+				i, interrupt_later[i], interrupt_init[i]);
+	}
+
+	if (temp <= temp_high)
+		tst_res(TFAIL, "Zone temperature is not rising as expected");
+	else
+		tst_res(TPASS, "x86 package thermal interrupt triggered");
+}
+
+static struct tst_test test = {
+	.cleanup = cleanup,
+	.forks_child = 1,
+	.needs_drivers = (const char *const []) {
+		"x86_pkg_temp_thermal",
+		NULL
+	},
+	.min_runtime = 180,
+	.needs_root = 1,
+	.setup = setup,
+	.supported_archs = (const char *const []) {
+		"x86",
+		"x86_64",
+		NULL
+	},
+	.tags = (const struct tst_tag[]) {
+		{"linux-git", "9635c586a559ba0e45b2bfbff79c937ddbaf1a62"},
+		{}
+	},
+	.test_all = run
+};
-- 
2.47.3

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Intel Technology Poland sp. z o.o.
ul. Slowackiego 173 | 80-298 Gdansk | Sad Rejonowy Gdansk Polnoc | VII Wydzial Gospodarczy Krajowego Rejestru Sadowego - KRS 101882 | NIP 957-07-52-316 | Kapital zakladowy 200.000 PLN.
Spolka oswiadcza, ze posiada status duzego przedsiebiorcy w rozumieniu ustawy z dnia 8 marca 2013 r. o przeciwdzialaniu nadmiernym opoznieniom w transakcjach handlowych.

Ta wiadomosc wraz z zalacznikami jest przeznaczona dla okreslonego adresata i moze zawierac informacje poufne. W razie przypadkowego otrzymania tej wiadomosci, prosimy o powiadomienie nadawcy oraz trwale jej usuniecie; jakiekolwiek przegladanie lub rozpowszechnianie jest zabronione.
This e-mail and any attachments may contain confidential material for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender and delete all copies; any review or distribution by others is strictly prohibited.


-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp

Re: [LTP] [PATCH v11] thermal: add new test group

[Petr Vorel]

Hi Piotr,

> Currently consists of only one test for the CPU package thermal sensor
> interface for Intel platforms.
> It works by checking the initial count of thermal interrupts. Then it
> decreases the threshold for sending a thermal interrupt to just above
> the current temperature and runs a workload on the CPU. Finally, it
> restores the original thermal threshold and checks whether the number
> of thermal interrupts increased.

> Signed-off-by: Piotr Kubaj <piotr.kubaj@intel.com>
> ---
> Patch version 11
> Switched 1 to true and added reference to kernel fix.

Generally LGTM, maybe Cyril will have some comments.
Reviewed-by: Petr Vorel <pvorel@suse.cz>

...
> +static void read_interrupts(uint64_t *interrupts, const int nproc)
> +{
> +	bool interrupts_found = false;
> +	char line[8192];
> +
> +	memset(interrupts, 0, nproc * sizeof(*interrupts));
> +	FILE *fp = SAFE_FOPEN("/proc/interrupts", "r");
> +
> +	while (fgets(line, sizeof(line), fp)) {
> +		if (strstr(line, "Thermal event interrupts")) {
> +			interrupts_found = true;
> +			char *ptr = strchr(line, ':');
> +
> +			for (int i = 0; i < nproc; i++) {
> +				char *endptr;
> +
> +				while (*ptr && !isdigit(*ptr))
> +					ptr++;
> +
> +				errno = 0;
> +
> +				interrupts[i] = strtoull(ptr, &endptr, 10);
> +
> +				if (ptr == endptr)
> +					tst_brk(TBROK, "interrupt not found");
> +
> +				if (errno == ERANGE)
> +					tst_brk(TCONF, "interrupt out of range");

I wonder if this is expected to happen. Can be value really over LLONG_MAX?

Because arch/x86/include/asm/hardirq.h has

unsigned int irq_thermal_count

=> if it's over the range, I'd quit with tst_brk(TBROK).

Also we don't have safe_strtoull() in lib/safe_macros.c
(it would be trivial to add) otherwise I would just use it.

(Otherwise IMHO Cyril's request from v8 was done
https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/aZ72j9KvkhsDF7Yf@yuki.lan/)

> +
> +				ptr = endptr;
> +				tst_res(TDEBUG, "interrupts[%d]: %ld", i, interrupts[i]);
> +			}
> +			break;
> +		}
> +	}
> +	SAFE_FCLOSE(fp);
> +	if (!interrupts_found)
> +		tst_brk(TCONF, "No Thermal event interrupts line in /proc/interrupts");
> +}

...
> +static void cleanup(void)
> +{
> +	if (x86_pkg_temp_tz_found)
> +		SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(trip_path, "%d", trip);
> +
> +	free(x86_pkg_temp_tz);
> +	free(interrupt_init);
> +	free(interrupt_later);
> +}
> +
> +static void run(void)
> +{
> +	for (int i = 0; i < tz_counter; i++) {
> +		if (x86_pkg_temp_tz[i])
> +			test_zone(i);
> +	}
> +	read_interrupts(interrupt_later, nproc);
> +
> +	for (int i = 0; i < nproc; i++) {
> +		if (interrupt_later[i] < interrupt_init[i])
> +			tst_res(TFAIL, "CPU %d interrupt counter: %ld (previous: %ld)",
> +				i, interrupt_later[i], interrupt_init[i]);
> +	}
> +
> +	if (temp <= temp_high)
> +		tst_res(TFAIL, "Zone temperature is not rising as expected");
> +	else
> +		tst_res(TPASS, "x86 package thermal interrupt triggered");
> +}
> +
> +static struct tst_test test = {
> +	.cleanup = cleanup,
> +	.forks_child = 1,
> +	.needs_drivers = (const char *const []) {
> +		"x86_pkg_temp_thermal",
> +		NULL
> +	},
nit: Alternatively instead of needs drivers we could check via .needs_kconfigs
for CONFIG_X86_THERMAL_VECTOR (functionality wrapped in kernel, defined in
drivers/thermal/intel/Kconfig). Cyril WDYT?

IMHO we slowly convert from modules.{dep,builtin} based search in
lib/tst_kernel.c to kconfig related checks (functionality which come to LTP
later).

> +	.min_runtime = 180,

Test is mostly super quick. I suppose we can lower down this to e.g. 5
because it depends on number of the zones.
But could we define it to 5 here and set in the setup correct value via
tst_set_runtime().

> +	.needs_root = 1,
> +	.setup = setup,
> +	.supported_archs = (const char *const []) {
> +		"x86",
> +		"x86_64",
> +		NULL
> +	},
This is somehow redundant to .needs_drivers/.needs_kconfigs. OTOH it nicely
defines which arch is targeted.

> +	.tags = (const struct tst_tag[]) {
> +		{"linux-git", "9635c586a559ba0e45b2bfbff79c937ddbaf1a62"},
FYI we normally use much shorter hash (12 chars), but IMHO this is good
approach. IMHO we should start to use sha1 (40 chars).

Kind regards,
Petr

> +		{}
> +	},
> +	.test_all = run
> +};

-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp

Re: [LTP] [PATCH v11] thermal: add new test group

[Cyril Hrubis]

Hi!
> > +static void read_interrupts(uint64_t *interrupts, const int nproc)
> > +{
> > +	bool interrupts_found = false;
> > +	char line[8192];
> > +
> > +	memset(interrupts, 0, nproc * sizeof(*interrupts));
> > +	FILE *fp = SAFE_FOPEN("/proc/interrupts", "r");
> > +
> > +	while (fgets(line, sizeof(line), fp)) {
> > +		if (strstr(line, "Thermal event interrupts")) {
> > +			interrupts_found = true;
> > +			char *ptr = strchr(line, ':');
> > +
> > +			for (int i = 0; i < nproc; i++) {
> > +				char *endptr;
> > +
> > +				while (*ptr && !isdigit(*ptr))
> > +					ptr++;
> > +
> > +				errno = 0;
> > +
> > +				interrupts[i] = strtoull(ptr, &endptr, 10);
> > +
> > +				if (ptr == endptr)
> > +					tst_brk(TBROK, "interrupt not found");
> > +
> > +				if (errno == ERANGE)
> > +					tst_brk(TCONF, "interrupt out of range");
> 
> I wonder if this is expected to happen. Can be value really over LLONG_MAX?

That's just to make sure that kernel generated sane result. In tests we
shouldn't blindly trust anything.

> Because arch/x86/include/asm/hardirq.h has
> 
> unsigned int irq_thermal_count
> 
> => if it's over the range, I'd quit with tst_brk(TBROK).

It should be TBROK indeed.

> Also we don't have safe_strtoull() in lib/safe_macros.c
> (it would be trivial to add) otherwise I would just use it.
> 
> (Otherwise IMHO Cyril's request from v8 was done
> https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/aZ72j9KvkhsDF7Yf@yuki.lan/)
> 
> > +
> > +				ptr = endptr;
> > +				tst_res(TDEBUG, "interrupts[%d]: %ld", i, interrupts[i]);
> > +			}
> > +			break;
> > +		}
> > +	}
> > +	SAFE_FCLOSE(fp);
> > +	if (!interrupts_found)
> > +		tst_brk(TCONF, "No Thermal event interrupts line in /proc/interrupts");
> > +}
> 
> ...
> > +static void cleanup(void)
> > +{
> > +	if (x86_pkg_temp_tz_found)
> > +		SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(trip_path, "%d", trip);
> > +
> > +	free(x86_pkg_temp_tz);
> > +	free(interrupt_init);
> > +	free(interrupt_later);
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void run(void)
> > +{
> > +	for (int i = 0; i < tz_counter; i++) {
> > +		if (x86_pkg_temp_tz[i])
> > +			test_zone(i);
> > +	}
> > +	read_interrupts(interrupt_later, nproc);
> > +
> > +	for (int i = 0; i < nproc; i++) {
> > +		if (interrupt_later[i] < interrupt_init[i])
> > +			tst_res(TFAIL, "CPU %d interrupt counter: %ld (previous: %ld)",
> > +				i, interrupt_later[i], interrupt_init[i]);
> > +	}
> > +
> > +	if (temp <= temp_high)
> > +		tst_res(TFAIL, "Zone temperature is not rising as expected");
> > +	else
> > +		tst_res(TPASS, "x86 package thermal interrupt triggered");
> > +}
> > +
> > +static struct tst_test test = {
> > +	.cleanup = cleanup,
> > +	.forks_child = 1,
> > +	.needs_drivers = (const char *const []) {
> > +		"x86_pkg_temp_thermal",
> > +		NULL
> > +	},
> nit: Alternatively instead of needs drivers we could check via .needs_kconfigs
> for CONFIG_X86_THERMAL_VECTOR (functionality wrapped in kernel, defined in
> drivers/thermal/intel/Kconfig). Cyril WDYT?

We would need to apply the kconfig patch I've send and then add hook for
the CONFIG_X86_THERMAL_VECTOR. I wouldn't wait for that with this patch,
we can fix it once our infrastructure is ready.

> IMHO we slowly convert from modules.{dep,builtin} based search in
> lib/tst_kernel.c to kconfig related checks (functionality which come to LTP
> later).
> 
> > +	.min_runtime = 180,
> 
> Test is mostly super quick. I suppose we can lower down this to e.g. 5
> because it depends on number of the zones.
> But could we define it to 5 here and set in the setup correct value via
> tst_set_runtime().
> 
> > +	.needs_root = 1,
> > +	.setup = setup,
> > +	.supported_archs = (const char *const []) {
> > +		"x86",
> > +		"x86_64",
> > +		NULL
> > +	},
> This is somehow redundant to .needs_drivers/.needs_kconfigs. OTOH it nicely
> defines which arch is targeted.

That's why I requested it to be added.

> > +	.tags = (const struct tst_tag[]) {
> > +		{"linux-git", "9635c586a559ba0e45b2bfbff79c937ddbaf1a62"},
> FYI we normally use much shorter hash (12 chars), but IMHO this is good
> approach. IMHO we should start to use sha1 (40 chars).
> 
> Kind regards,
> Petr
> 
> > +		{}
> > +	},
> > +	.test_all = run
> > +};

-- 
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz

-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp

Re: [LTP] [PATCH v11] thermal: add new test group

[Petr Vorel]

Hi all,

TL;DR: no more concerns from my side.

> Hi!
> > > +static void read_interrupts(uint64_t *interrupts, const int nproc)
> > > +{
> > > +	bool interrupts_found = false;
> > > +	char line[8192];
> > > +
> > > +	memset(interrupts, 0, nproc * sizeof(*interrupts));
> > > +	FILE *fp = SAFE_FOPEN("/proc/interrupts", "r");
> > > +
> > > +	while (fgets(line, sizeof(line), fp)) {
> > > +		if (strstr(line, "Thermal event interrupts")) {
> > > +			interrupts_found = true;
> > > +			char *ptr = strchr(line, ':');
> > > +
> > > +			for (int i = 0; i < nproc; i++) {
> > > +				char *endptr;
> > > +
> > > +				while (*ptr && !isdigit(*ptr))
> > > +					ptr++;
> > > +
> > > +				errno = 0;
> > > +
> > > +				interrupts[i] = strtoull(ptr, &endptr, 10);
> > > +
> > > +				if (ptr == endptr)
> > > +					tst_brk(TBROK, "interrupt not found");
> > > +
> > > +				if (errno == ERANGE)
> > > +					tst_brk(TCONF, "interrupt out of range");

> > I wonder if this is expected to happen. Can be value really over LLONG_MAX?

> That's just to make sure that kernel generated sane result. In tests we
> shouldn't blindly trust anything.

Makes sense.

> > Because arch/x86/include/asm/hardirq.h has

> > unsigned int irq_thermal_count

> > => if it's over the range, I'd quit with tst_brk(TBROK).

> It should be TBROK indeed.

> > Also we don't have safe_strtoull() in lib/safe_macros.c
> > (it would be trivial to add) otherwise I would just use it.

> > (Otherwise IMHO Cyril's request from v8 was done
> > https://lore.kernel.org/ltp/aZ72j9KvkhsDF7Yf@yuki.lan/)

> > > +
> > > +				ptr = endptr;
> > > +				tst_res(TDEBUG, "interrupts[%d]: %ld", i, interrupts[i]);
> > > +			}
> > > +			break;
> > > +		}
> > > +	}
> > > +	SAFE_FCLOSE(fp);
> > > +	if (!interrupts_found)
> > > +		tst_brk(TCONF, "No Thermal event interrupts line in /proc/interrupts");
> > > +}

> > ...
> > > +static void cleanup(void)
> > > +{
> > > +	if (x86_pkg_temp_tz_found)
> > > +		SAFE_FILE_PRINTF(trip_path, "%d", trip);
> > > +
> > > +	free(x86_pkg_temp_tz);
> > > +	free(interrupt_init);
> > > +	free(interrupt_later);
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static void run(void)
> > > +{
> > > +	for (int i = 0; i < tz_counter; i++) {
> > > +		if (x86_pkg_temp_tz[i])
> > > +			test_zone(i);
> > > +	}
> > > +	read_interrupts(interrupt_later, nproc);
> > > +
> > > +	for (int i = 0; i < nproc; i++) {
> > > +		if (interrupt_later[i] < interrupt_init[i])
> > > +			tst_res(TFAIL, "CPU %d interrupt counter: %ld (previous: %ld)",
> > > +				i, interrupt_later[i], interrupt_init[i]);
> > > +	}
> > > +
> > > +	if (temp <= temp_high)
> > > +		tst_res(TFAIL, "Zone temperature is not rising as expected");
> > > +	else
> > > +		tst_res(TPASS, "x86 package thermal interrupt triggered");
> > > +}
> > > +
> > > +static struct tst_test test = {
> > > +	.cleanup = cleanup,
> > > +	.forks_child = 1,
> > > +	.needs_drivers = (const char *const []) {
> > > +		"x86_pkg_temp_thermal",
> > > +		NULL
> > > +	},
> > nit: Alternatively instead of needs drivers we could check via .needs_kconfigs
> > for CONFIG_X86_THERMAL_VECTOR (functionality wrapped in kernel, defined in
> > drivers/thermal/intel/Kconfig). Cyril WDYT?

> We would need to apply the kconfig patch I've send and then add hook for
> the CONFIG_X86_THERMAL_VECTOR. I wouldn't wait for that with this patch,
> we can fix it once our infrastructure is ready.

Ah, I haven't noticed x86_pkg_temp_thermal driver can be disabled in the runtime
(otherwise there is always /sys/class/thermal/ when compiled with
CONFIG_X86_THERMAL_VECTOR). But sure, let's keep it this way, I also don't want
to block this effort.

> > IMHO we slowly convert from modules.{dep,builtin} based search in
> > lib/tst_kernel.c to kconfig related checks (functionality which come to LTP
> > later).

> > > +	.min_runtime = 180,

> > Test is mostly super quick. I suppose we can lower down this to e.g. 5
> > because it depends on number of the zones.
> > But could we define it to 5 here and set in the setup correct value via
> > tst_set_runtime().

> > > +	.needs_root = 1,
> > > +	.setup = setup,
> > > +	.supported_archs = (const char *const []) {
> > > +		"x86",
> > > +		"x86_64",
> > > +		NULL
> > > +	},
> > This is somehow redundant to .needs_drivers/.needs_kconfigs. OTOH it nicely
> > defines which arch is targeted.

> That's why I requested it to be added.

I'm sorry, I overlooked you asked for it.

Kind regards,
Petr

-- 
Mailing list info: https://lists.linux.it/listinfo/ltp