[LTP] [PATCH v8] thermal: add new test group
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz
Wed Feb 25 14:18:07 CET 2026
Hi!
> runtest/thermal | 3 +
> scenario_groups/default | 1 +
> testcases/kernel/Makefile | 1 +
> testcases/kernel/thermal/.gitignore | 1 +
> testcases/kernel/thermal/Makefile | 9 +
> .../kernel/thermal/thermal_interrupt_events.c | 212 ++++++++++++++++++
> 6 files changed, 227 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/scenario_groups/default b/scenario_groups/default
> index 0e76b2bee..ffdd7ff25 100644
> --- a/scenario_groups/default
> +++ b/scenario_groups/default
> @@ -26,3 +26,4 @@ crypto
> kernel_misc
> uevent
> watchqueue
> +thermal
We just removed the scenario_groups that were only used by the
deprecated runltp.
> 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 \
I wonder if it would make more sense to add the test to the kernel_misc
runtest file instead of creating a new one. Are you going to write more
thermal related tests?
> 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..7a241cb51
> --- /dev/null
> +++ b/testcases/kernel/thermal/thermal_interrupt_events.c
> @@ -0,0 +1,212 @@
> +// 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 "tst_safe_stdio.h"
> +#include "tst_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[NAME_MAX], trip_path[NAME_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 *token = strtok(line, " ");
> +
> + token = strtok(NULL, " ");
> + int i = 0;
> +
> + while (!!strncmp(token, "Thermal", 7)) {
We should possibly check that i < nprocs here as well. Or just do a for
loop from 0 to < nprocs and properly parse the number and TBROK if we do
not get a number. We can also use strtoull() to consume the string
without breaking it into tokens.
Something as;
char *ptr = strchr(line, ':');
if (!ptr)
//line does not start with XYZ:
ptr += 1;
for (i = 0; i < nprocs; i++) {
char *endptr;
errno = 0;
interrupts[i] = strtoll(ptr, &endptr, 10);
if (ptr == endptr)
//wrong input
if (errno == ERANGE)
//overflow
ptr = endptr
}
> + interrupts[i++] = atoll(token);
> + token = strtok(NULL, " ");
> + tst_res(TDEBUG, "interrupts[%d]: %ld", i - 1, interrupts[i - 1]);
> + }
> + 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));
^
SAFE_CALLOC()
> + 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"))) > 0)
What are we trying to match here? That the d_name has "thremal_zone"
prefix? If that is so the sizeof("thermal_zone") is wrong since sizeof()
always includes the space for '\0'.
I.e. sizeof("thermal_zone") == strlen("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));
^
SAFE_CALLOC()
> + for (int i = 0; i < tz_counter; i++) {
> + char path[NAME_MAX];
> +
> + snprintf(path, NAME_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] = 1;
> + x86_pkg_temp_tz_found = 1;
> + }
> + }
> +
> + if (!x86_pkg_temp_tz_found)
> + tst_brk(TCONF, "No thermal zone uses x86_pkg_temp");
> +}
> +
> +static void *cpu_workload(double run_time)
> +{
> + time_t start_time = time(NULL);
> + int num = 2;
> +
> + while (difftime(time(NULL), start_time) < run_time) {
> + 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;
Tracking elapsed time with wall clock is not a good idea in general.
There may be a ntp client running on the system and the wall time can
jump back or forth. We do have a helper functions to track time with
monotonic timers:
tst_timer_start(CLOCK_MONOTONIC);
while (!tst_timer_expired_ms(RUNTIME * 1000)) {
/* Do the work here */
}
> +}
> +
> +static void test_zone(int i)
> +{
> + char path[NAME_MAX] = {0};
^
This should be PATH_MAX.
Generally NAME_MAX is a limit for a file or directory name, while
PATH_MAX is a limit for a path passed to a syscall.
> + int sleep_time = SLEEP;
> + double run_time = RUNTIME;
> +
> + snprintf(path, NAME_MAX, "/sys/class/thermal/thermal_zone%d/", i);
> + strncpy(temp_path, path, NAME_MAX);
> + strncat(temp_path, "temp", 4);
Why just not use a single snprintf()?
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", path, temp);
> +
> + temp_high = temp + TEMP_INCREMENT;
> +
> + strncpy(trip_path, path, NAME_MAX);
> + strncat(trip_path, "trip_point_1_temp", 17);
Here as well:
snprintf(temp_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", 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]);
What are we trying to assert here? The interrupt counters should never
decrease, that's unlikely to happen. Shouldn't we instead check that the
interrupts increased at least for one column?
> + }
> +
> + 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
> + },
> + .test_all = run
> +};
--
Cyril Hrubis
chrubis@suse.cz
More information about the ltp
mailing list