test-case: rename pause-resume to pause-release

[fredoh9]

resume term leads to confusion with system resume. Nothing to do with system suspend/resume test. pause-release is more clear.

fixes: #792

test plan in SOF CI system also need to rename the command also when this is merged.

[marc-hb]

I disagree sorry.

The only way to confuse "pause/resume" with suspend/resume is to ignore the first word! I've never seen anyone confusing "pause" with "suspend". So this is a whole lot of code churn and potential git conflicts for solving a minor issue.

The official man aplay calls it "pause/resume"

"release" is not the opposite of "pause", "release" is the opposite of "acquire". Morever, playing typically acquires resources while pausing releases them.

If other people think a change is really necessary then pause-unpause or pause-start would be better

[kv2019i]

A bit concerned with the transition time with existing scripts running check-pause-resume.sh getting broken with this -- see inline comment. Otherwise seems good.

[plbossart]

I support this change 100%, but the only want to avoid naming issues is to use the ALSA terminology:

check_pause_push_pause_release is a bit longer but will avoid any confusions.

And yes a symlink is required until all references to the old script are removed.

[marc-hb]

I support this change 100%, but the only want to avoid naming issues is to use the ALSA terminology:

Can you please share a link to the official ALSA terminology? I did a quick search but I only found "pause/resume" in man aplay.

check_pause_push_pause_release is a bit longer but will avoid any confusions.

What could the much shorter check-pause-unpause be confused with?

[plbossart]

https://elixir.bootlin.com/linux/latest/source/include/sound/pcm.h#L100

this is a kernel test, let's use kernel terminology.

We have similar confusions in SoundWire between clock_pause, stretch, stop, resume, restart.

Use one set of words clearly linked to a well-defined concept is key. Unpause is not such a word, sorry.

overruled

[marc-hb]

https://sof-ci.01.org/softestpr/PR1025/build285/devicetest/index.html?model=MTLP_RVP_NOCODEC&testcase=multiple-pause-resume-50 (internal 23679) failed with a strange warning (that did not cause the failure)

=== PAUSE ===                                                            
(50/50) pcm'Deepbuffer Port0' cmd'aplay' id'8': Wait for 49 ms before pause

(50/50) pcm'Deepbuffer Port0' cmd'aplay' id'8': Wait for 33 ms before release

2023-04-17 22:31:56 UTC [REMOTE_INFO] pipeline: Port2 with arecord
2023-04-17 22:31:56 UTC [REMOTE_INFO] pipeline: Deepbuffer Port0 with aplay
2023-04-17 22:31:56 UTC [REMOTE_INFO] Check expect exit status
2023-04-17 22:31:56 UTC [REMOTE_WARNING] SOF_TEST_TOP_PID=17709 already defined, multiple lib.sh inclusions?
declare -- cmd="journalctl_cmd --since=@1681770512"
2023-04-17 22:31:56 UTC [REMOTE_ERROR] pause release PID 19337 had non-zero exit status
2023-04-17 22:31:56 UTC [REMOTE_ERROR] Starting func_exit_handler(), exit status=1, FUNCNAME stack:
2023-04-17 22:31:56 UTC [REMOTE_ERROR]  die()  @  /home/ubuntu/sof-test/test-case/../case-lib/lib.sh
2023-04-17 22:31:56 UTC [REMOTE_ERROR]  main()  @  /home/ubuntu/sof-test/test-case/multiple-pause-resume.sh:191
2023-04-17 22:31:57 UTC [REMOTE_INFO] pkill -TERM -f mtrace-reader.py
2023-04-17 22:31:57 UTC [REMOTE_INFO] ktime=1755 sof-test PID=17709: ending
2023-04-17 22:31:57 UTC [REMOTE_INFO] Test Result: FAIL!

[marc-hb]

shellcheck warnings fixed in #1026, minor conflict now, needs rebase.

[fredoh9]

rebased top of main

[marc-hb]

Instead of the symbolic links you could use an exec like in test-case/multiple-pipeline-capture.sh which would give you the possibility of printing a deprecation warning.

[fredoh9]

@marc-hb I take adding symbolic links is really short term solution. I could update the test case database in same time with the merge without the symbolic link. as soon as this merge.
I think adding a wrapper is over kill for real short time. I will submit a revert PR for the commit as soon as this merge.

[marc-hb]

There are always more users than you think. In fact there is already one in this repo that you missed, looks like you didn't git grep.

[fredoh9]

missed run-all-test.sh

[fredoh9]

@marc-hb @plbossart @ranj063 do you have any comment for this PR?