[PATCH] [v6] fwts: skip the wake alarm suite if the feature is not implemented

[Al Korv]

On Monday, 18 August 2025 03:59:36 British Summer Time Ivan Hu wrote:
> Thanks for the patch.
> 
> On Sun, Aug 10, 2025 at 12:17 AM Al Korv <alkorv at posteo.uk> wrote:
> > The wake alarm may be not implemented on a non-x86 platform
> > thus the calls to the RTC alarm interface may legitimately
> > fail. Although the wake alarm test suite appears to antici-
> > pate this and skips the first test on a non-x86 platform if
> > fwts_wakealarm_get() fails, the subsequent tests fail in this
> > case, contrary to the error message printed in the non-x86
> > branch of the routine wakealarm_test1(). Here's an excerpt
> > 
> > from the FWTS results log obtained in such an environmemnt:
> >  wakealarm: ACPI Wakealarm tests.
> >  ---------------------------------------------------------
> >  Test 1 of 5: Test existence of RTC with alarm interface.
> >  Cannot read Real Time Clock Alarm with ioctl RTC_ALM_READ
> >  /dev/rtc0.
> >  non-x86 devices sometimes do not have an RTC wake alarm that
> >  is normally controlled by the RTC alarm ioctl() interface.
> >  This interface does not exist, so the wake alarm tests will
> >  be skipped.
> >  
> >  Test 2 of 5: Trigger wakealarm for 1 seconds in the future.
> >  Trigger wakealarm for 1 seconds in the future.
> >  Cannot enable alarm interrupts on Real Time Clock device
> >  /dev/rtc0.
> >  FAILED [MEDIUM] WakeAlarmNotTriggeredTest2: Test 2, RTC
> >  wakealarm did not trigger.
> >  
> >  Test 3 of 5: Test if wakealarm is fired.
> >  Cannot enable alarm interrupts on Real Time Clock device
> >  /dev/rtc0.
> >  FAILED [MEDIUM] WakeAlarmNotTriggeredTest3: Test 3, Failed
> >  to trigger and fire wakealarm.
> >  
> >  Test 4 of 5: Multiple wakealarm firing tests.
> >  Trigger wakealarm for 1 seconds in the future.
> >  Cannot enable alarm interrupts on Real Time Clock device
> >  /dev/rtc0.
> >  FAILED [MEDIUM] WakeAlarmNotTriggeredTest4: Test 4, Failed
> >  to trigger and fire wakealarm.
> >  
> >  Test 5 of 5: Reset wakealarm time.
> >  Cannot set Real Time Clock Alarm with ioctl RTC_ALM_SET /dev/rtc0.
> >  FAILED [MEDIUM] WakeAlarmNotResetTest5: Test 5, RTC wakealarm
> >  failed to be reset back to original time.
> >  
> >  =================================================================
> >  0 passed, 4 failed, 0 warning, 0 aborted, 0 skipped, 0 info only.
> >  =================================================================
> > 
> > This happens because the routine fwts_framework_run_test() stops
> > performing the suite only if its test returns FWTS_ABORTED or its
> > init callback returns FWTS_SKIP while neither is the case here.
> > 
> > The patch fixes the issue by introducing the initialization call-
> > back for the suite, the callback checks on a non-x86 platform whe-
> > ther the attribute 'wakealarm' of the device rtc0 is exposed via
> > sysfs; if the attribute is absent, then the suite will be skip-
> > ped. The wakealarm suite report looks as follows after the patch
> > 
> > is applied:
> >  wakealarm: ACPI Wakealarm tests.
> >  ------------------------------------------------------------
> >  Cannot read Real Time Clock Alarm with ioctl RTC_ALM_READ
> >  /dev/rtc0.
> >  non-x86 devices sometimes do not have an RTC wake alarm that
> >  is normally controlled by the RTC alarm ioctl() interface.
> >  This interface does not exist, so the wake alarm tests will
> >  be skipped.
> >  =================================================================
> >  0 passed, 0 failed, 0 warning, 0 aborted, 5 skipped, 0 info only.
> >  =================================================================
> > 
> > Signed-off-by: Al Korv <alkorv at posteo.uk>
> > ---
> > 
> >  src/acpi/wakealarm/wakealarm.c | 15 +++++++++++++++
> >  1 file changed, 15 insertions(+)
> > 
> > diff --git a/src/acpi/wakealarm/wakealarm.c
> > b/src/acpi/wakealarm/wakealarm.c
> > index 89512540..0566de2f 100644
> > --- a/src/acpi/wakealarm/wakealarm.c
> > +++ b/src/acpi/wakealarm/wakealarm.c
> > @@ -32,6 +32,20 @@
> > 
> >  static struct rtc_time rtc_tm;
> > 
> > +static int wakealarm_test_init(fwts_framework *fw)
> 
> minor, maybe only wakealarm_init
> 
> > +{
> > +       (void)fw;
> 
> you can use the  FWTS_UNUSED(fw);
> 
> > +#ifndef FWTS_ARCH_INTEL
> > +       struct stat st;
> > +       if (stat("/sys/class/rtc/rtc0/wakealarm", &st) == -1) {
> > +               fwts_log_info(fw, "An RTC wake alarm is not available.");
> > +               return FWTS_SKIP;
> > +       }
> 
> +
> 
> > +#endif
> > +       return FWTS_OK;
> > +}
> 
> I think the current problem is that test1 has the ability to check and skip
> itself, but tests 2–5 don’t skip properly.
> It might be simpler to just add a variable to handle the skip check, as
> your v3 patch does, rather than creating an additional init function for
> checking again.
> 
> Cheers,
> Ivan
> 
> ** it adjusts the routines wakealarm_test[2-5]() to return
> *>*    FWTS_SKIP if the 1st test is skipped.*
> 

OK, thanks for the suggestion, please find the updated version
of the patch in the reply.

> > +
> > 
> >  static int wakealarm_test1(fwts_framework *fw)
> >  {
> >  
> >         if (fwts_wakealarm_get(fw, &rtc_tm) == FWTS_OK) {
> > 
> > @@ -172,6 +186,7 @@ static fwts_framework_minor_test wakealarm_tests[] = {
> > 
> >  static fwts_framework_ops wakealarm_ops = {
> >  
> >         .description = "ACPI Wakealarm tests.",
> > 
> > +       .init = wakealarm_test_init,
> > 
> >         .minor_tests = wakealarm_tests
> >  
> >  };
> > 
> > --
> > 2.39.5

--
Sincerely yours,
Al Korv