[Libvirt-cim] KVM test report on Fedora 9 (4/30)

[Kaitlin Rupert]

 > wbemain -ac KVM_ElementConformsToProfile 
'http://u:p@host:5988/root/virt:KVM_ComputerSystem.CreationClassName="KVM_ComputerSystem",Name="domgst"' 


> I dont see the KVM_ElementConformsToProfile.CIM_ElementConformsToProfile 
> registered in the root#virt namespace on F9  machine with rpm 
> libvirt-cim, while the same is present in both the root#interop and 
> root#virt namespace on F9 machine with latest libvirt-cim sources.

This might be a bug in the rpm install - I'll take a look.

> I tried copying the provider manually to the root#virt namespace and 
> restarted the cimserver, but I did not get any results even after that.
> I dont know if this is proper way of registering the mof files in the 
> namespace.

To register a mof file, you can do the following:

sudo cimmofl -uc -aEV -R$PEGASUS_REPO -n /root/virt <mof file>

Where PEGASUS_REPO is the location of your Pegasus repository (probably 
PEGASUS_REPO=/var/lib/Pegasus).

However, the rpm should be doing this for you.

> Although, the above wbemcli gives me expected o/p on the
> F9 with rpm when the query includes the root/interop namespace,
> While on the F9 with latest source I get o/p for query with root/virt 
> namespace.

ECTP is a cross-namespace provider.  For our implementation, that means 
the ECTP mof is registered to both root/interop and root/virt.  The 
provider is also registered to both name spaces.

You said said the following query works for you with the F9 rpm:

wbemain -ac KVM_ElementConformsToProfile 
'http://localhost:5988/root/interop:KVM_ComputerSystem.CreationClassName="KVM_ComputerSystem",Name="domgst"'

That's a bug which been fixed in recent sources.  You should see the 
following:

*
* wbemain: Cim: (6) CIM_ERR_NOT_FOUND: CIM_ERR_NOT_FOUND: 
KVM_ComputerSystem.CreationClassName="KVM_ComputerSystem",Name="domgst"
*

This query is asking for the associators for this reference in the 
interop namespace.  However, that instance doesn't exist in the interop 
namespace - it should only exist in the virt namespace.  To verify, you 
can try the following query - it should also fail:

wbemcli gi 
'http://localhost:5988/root/interop:KVM_ComputerSystem.CreationClassName="KVM_ComputerSystem",Name="domgst"'

 > Could you please tell me the namespace and ECTP provider registration
 > details.

Take a look at the ECTP registration file 
(schema/ElementConformsToProfile.registration) and compare this with the 
registration file for ComputerSystem (schema/ComputerSystem.registration).

>>
>>> ElementSettingData - 03_esd_assoc_with_rasd_errs.py: FAIL
>> This one passed in individual run. The previous ElementConforms.04 
>> undefine fix doesn't help here. Might be some other unknown missing 
>> undefine.

Is the test failing because it cannot create the guest, or is it due to 
some other issue?

>>
>>> NetworkPort - 03_user_netport.py: FAIL
>> 'user' network type.
>> [Known Issue]
>>
>>> ReferencedProfile - 01_verify_refprof.py: FAIL
>> Binary rpm provider gives 2 results on the following query:
>>   wbemein http://u:p@host:5988/root/interop:KVM_RegisteredProfile
>> "CIM:DSP1042-SystemVirtualization-1.0.0"
>> "CIM:DSP1057-VirtualSystem-1.0.0a"
>> Same wbemcli command gets 5 results on changeset-533 tree on another 
>> system.
>> "CIM:DSP1042-SystemVirtualization-1.0.0"
>> "CIM:DSP1057-VirtualSystem-1.0.0a"
>> "CIM:DSP1059-GenericDeviceResourceVirtualization-1.0.0"
>> "CIM:DSP1045-MemoryResourceVirtualization-1.0.0"
>> "CIM:DSP1081-VirtualSystemMigration-1.0"
> Yes this is correct.
>> This leads to ReferencedProfile's 'ain' query gets only 2 results.
>>
> I did not see the ReferncedProfile query return any results.
> since the ReferencedProfile is not present on the on an rpm libvirt-cim 
> based F9 machine and hence the ain query fails without any results.
>>> ReferencedProfile - 02_refprofile_errs.py: FAIL
>> Same as ReferencedProfile.01
>>
> I think the ReferncedProfile was added with the changeset 500 and the 
> rpm contains the changes till 393, hence I think the ReferencedProfile 
> did not get registered on the machine.

Close - it's changeset 501.

> Should we skip the above test cases for rpm based F9 ?

Yes - that's a good idea.  You can check the changeset version, and skip 
if it's lower than changeset 501.


Thanks!
-- 
Kaitlin Rupert
IBM Linux Technology Center
kaitlin at linux.vnet.ibm.com