On 11. 07. 24 16:33, Mark Brown wrote:
Currently for the PCM and mixer tests we report test names which identify the card being tested with the card number. This ensures we have unique names but since card numbers are dynamically assigned at runtime the names we end up with will often not be stable on systems with multiple cards especially where those cards are provided by separate modules loeaded at runtime. This makes it difficult for automated systems and UIs to relate test results between runs on affected platforms. Address this by replacing our use of card numbers with card names which are more likely to be stable across runs. We use the long name since in the case where we have two of the same card it is more likely to include deduplication information (eg, HDA cards include the address/IRQ). The resulting information is not the most beautiful for human readers but the majority of kselftest output consumption is automated systems and it wasn't that great anyway. Signed-off-by: Mark Brown <broonie@xxxxxxxxxx>
I think that a combination of card number and card ID may be sufficient (and a compromise). It's shorter and user-friendly. Additionally, a table may be printed at the beginning of report with card number, card ID and long card name for further processing and identification.
Jaroslav -- Jaroslav Kysela <perex@xxxxxxxx> Linux Sound Maintainer; ALSA Project; Red Hat, Inc.
