On 16/05/2024 19:28:47-0700, Joseph Jang wrote:
In alarm_wkalm_set and alarm_wkalm_set_minute test, they use different ioctl (RTC_ALM_SET/RTC_WKALM_SET) for alarm feature detection. They will skip testing if RTC_ALM_SET/RTC_WKALM_SET ioctl returns an EINVAL error code. This design may miss detecting real problems when the efi.set_wakeup_time() return errors and then RTC_ALM_SET/RTC_WKALM_SET ioctl returns an EINVAL error code with RTC_FEATURE_ALARM enabled.
In order to make rtctest more explicit and robust, we propose to use RTC_PARAM_GET ioctl interface to check rtc alarm feature state before running alarm related tests. If the kernel does not support RTC_PARAM_GET ioctl interface, we will fallback to check the presence of "alarm" in /proc/driver/rtc.
The rtctest requires the read permission on /dev/rtc0. The rtctest will be skipped if the /dev/rtc0 is not readable.
This change as to be separated. Also, I'm not sure what happened with https://lore.kernel.org/all/20230717175251.54390-1-atulpant.linux@gmail.com/
Requires commit 101ca8d05913b ("rtc: efi: Enable SET/GET WAKEUP services as optional")
Reviewed-by: Jeremy Szu jszu@nvidia.com Reviewed-by: Matthew R. Ochs mochs@nvidia.com Signed-off-by: Joseph Jang jjang@nvidia.com
tools/testing/selftests/rtc/Makefile | 2 +- tools/testing/selftests/rtc/rtctest.c | 72 +++++++++++++++++++-------- 2 files changed, 53 insertions(+), 21 deletions(-)
diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/rtc/Makefile b/tools/testing/selftests/rtc/Makefile index 55198ecc04db..6e3a98fb24ba 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/rtc/Makefile +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/rtc/Makefile @@ -1,5 +1,5 @@ # SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-2.0 -CFLAGS += -O3 -Wl,-no-as-needed -Wall +CFLAGS += -O3 -Wl,-no-as-needed -Wall -I../../../../usr/include/ LDLIBS += -lrt -lpthread -lm TEST_GEN_PROGS = rtctest diff --git a/tools/testing/selftests/rtc/rtctest.c b/tools/testing/selftests/rtc/rtctest.c index 63ce02d1d5cc..aa47b17fbd1a 100644 --- a/tools/testing/selftests/rtc/rtctest.c +++ b/tools/testing/selftests/rtc/rtctest.c @@ -8,6 +8,7 @@ #include <errno.h> #include <fcntl.h> #include <linux/rtc.h> +#include <stdbool.h> #include <stdio.h> #include <stdlib.h> #include <sys/ioctl.h> @@ -24,12 +25,17 @@ #define READ_LOOP_SLEEP_MS 11 static char *rtc_file = "/dev/rtc0"; +static char *rtc_procfs = "/proc/driver/rtc"; FIXTURE(rtc) { int fd; }; FIXTURE_SETUP(rtc) {
- if (access(rtc_file, R_OK) != 0)
SKIP(return, "Skipping test since cannot access %s, perhaps miss sudo",rtc_file);
- self->fd = open(rtc_file, O_RDONLY);
} @@ -82,6 +88,36 @@ static void nanosleep_with_retries(long ns) } } +static bool is_rtc_alarm_supported(int fd) +{
- struct rtc_param param = { 0 };
- int rc;
- char buf[1024] = { 0 };
- /* Validate kernel reflects unsupported RTC alarm state */
- param.param = RTC_PARAM_FEATURES;
- param.index = 0;
- rc = ioctl(fd, RTC_PARAM_GET, ¶m);
- if (rc < 0) {
/* Fallback to read rtc procfs */fd = open(rtc_procfs, O_RDONLY);
I think I was clear on the previous thread, no new users of the procfs interface. You can carry this n your own tree but that can't be upstream.
if (fd != -1) {rc = read(fd, buf, sizeof(buf));close(fd);/* Check for the presence of "alarm" in the buf */if (strstr(buf, "alarm") == NULL)return false;} elsereturn false;- } else {
if ((param.uvalue & _BITUL(RTC_FEATURE_ALARM)) == 0)return false;- }
- return true;
+}
TEST_F_TIMEOUT(rtc, date_read_loop, READ_LOOP_DURATION_SEC + 2) { int rc; long iter_count = 0; @@ -202,6 +238,9 @@ TEST_F(rtc, alarm_alm_set) { SKIP(return, "Skipping test since %s does not exist", rtc_file); ASSERT_NE(-1, self->fd);
- if (!is_rtc_alarm_supported(self->fd))
SKIP(return, "Skipping test since alarms are not supported.");- rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_RD_TIME, &tm); ASSERT_NE(-1, rc);
@@ -209,11 +248,7 @@ TEST_F(rtc, alarm_alm_set) { gmtime_r(&secs, (struct tm *)&tm); rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_ALM_SET, &tm);
- if (rc == -1) {
ASSERT_EQ(EINVAL, errno);TH_LOG("skip alarms are not supported.");return;- }
- ASSERT_NE(-1, rc);
rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_ALM_READ, &tm); ASSERT_NE(-1, rc); @@ -260,6 +295,9 @@ TEST_F(rtc, alarm_wkalm_set) { SKIP(return, "Skipping test since %s does not exist", rtc_file); ASSERT_NE(-1, self->fd);
- if (!is_rtc_alarm_supported(self->fd))
SKIP(return, "Skipping test since alarms are not supported.");- rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_RD_TIME, &alarm.time); ASSERT_NE(-1, rc);
@@ -269,11 +307,7 @@ TEST_F(rtc, alarm_wkalm_set) { alarm.enabled = 1; rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_WKALM_SET, &alarm);
- if (rc == -1) {
ASSERT_EQ(EINVAL, errno);TH_LOG("skip alarms are not supported.");return;- }
- ASSERT_NE(-1, rc);
rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_WKALM_RD, &alarm); ASSERT_NE(-1, rc); @@ -312,6 +346,9 @@ TEST_F_TIMEOUT(rtc, alarm_alm_set_minute, 65) { SKIP(return, "Skipping test since %s does not exist", rtc_file); ASSERT_NE(-1, self->fd);
- if (!is_rtc_alarm_supported(self->fd))
SKIP(return, "Skipping test since alarms are not supported.");- rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_RD_TIME, &tm); ASSERT_NE(-1, rc);
@@ -319,11 +356,7 @@ TEST_F_TIMEOUT(rtc, alarm_alm_set_minute, 65) { gmtime_r(&secs, (struct tm *)&tm); rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_ALM_SET, &tm);
- if (rc == -1) {
ASSERT_EQ(EINVAL, errno);TH_LOG("skip alarms are not supported.");return;- }
- ASSERT_NE(-1, rc);
rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_ALM_READ, &tm); ASSERT_NE(-1, rc); @@ -370,6 +403,9 @@ TEST_F_TIMEOUT(rtc, alarm_wkalm_set_minute, 65) { SKIP(return, "Skipping test since %s does not exist", rtc_file); ASSERT_NE(-1, self->fd);
- if (!is_rtc_alarm_supported(self->fd))
SKIP(return, "Skipping test since alarms are not supported.");- rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_RD_TIME, &alarm.time); ASSERT_NE(-1, rc);
@@ -379,11 +415,7 @@ TEST_F_TIMEOUT(rtc, alarm_wkalm_set_minute, 65) { alarm.enabled = 1; rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_WKALM_SET, &alarm);
- if (rc == -1) {
ASSERT_EQ(EINVAL, errno);TH_LOG("skip alarms are not supported.");return;- }
- ASSERT_NE(-1, rc);
rc = ioctl(self->fd, RTC_WKALM_RD, &alarm); ASSERT_NE(-1, rc); -- 2.34.1