[LTP] [PATCH] device-drivers/cpufreq_boost: skip test on virtual machines

[Krzysztof Kozlowski]

On 23/06/2021 17:33, Krzysztof Kozlowski wrote:
> On 23/06/2021 13:38, Cyril Hrubis wrote:
>> Hi!
>>>> diff --git a/testcases/kernel/device-drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_boost.c b/testcases/kernel/device-drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_boost.c
>>>> index b9739db37cb7..67917b3fea25 100644
>>>> --- a/testcases/kernel/device-drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_boost.c
>>>> +++ b/testcases/kernel/device-drivers/cpufreq/cpufreq_boost.c
>>>> @@ -90,6 +90,9 @@ static void setup(void)
>>>>  	unsigned int i;
>>>>  	tst_require_root();
>>>>  
>>>> +	if (tst_is_virt(VIRT_ANY))
>>>> +		tst_brkm(TCONF, NULL, "running in a virtual machine, overclock not reliably measureable");
>>>> +
>>>>  	for (i = 0; i < ARRAY_SIZE(cdrv); ++i) {
>>>>  		fd = open(cdrv[i].file, O_RDWR);
>>>>  		if (fd == -1)
>>>>
>>>
>>> Optionally, under virtual machine the test failure could be converted to
>>> accepted pass. This would still allow to test CPUfreq boosting
>>> interface. Any preferences?
>>
>> I wonder what is the likehood of actually dicovering a bug by writing to
>> the cpufreq boost file from within a VM, I guess that it's non-zero at
>> least.
> 
> It's a test of kernel interface and whether the driver accepts input via
> sysfs... so not much of a real cpufreq test. Indeed maybe better to skip
> the test explicitly instead of giving some false hopes that cpufreq is
> being tested.

Hi Cyril and all,

Anything stops this patch from being applied?

Best regards,
Krzysztof