[Libvirt-cim] Re: Fw: [TEST] Test failure summary for Xen/XenFV with and without sblim base providers with current resource

[Guo Lian Yun]

libvirt-cim-bounces at redhat.com wrote on 2008-09-17 01:54:39:

> >  >
> >  > This is the intended behavior.  The HosySystem class is just a
> >  > placeholder - if the guest has the SBLIM providers installed, then 
the
> >  > proper class to represent the host is Linux_ComputerSystem (this is 
the
> >  > SBLIM provider that represents the "base" or host system).
> >  >
> >  > We don't want the HostSystem provider to return anything in this 
case,
> >  > because there's no need for a placeholder.
> > 
> >   If the HostSystem provider return NULL, how to make test case work? 
> > Because
> >   the test expects to return at least one Xen_HostSystem instance.
> >   Would you please explain more for me on this? Any suggestion on 
fixing 
> > them?
> > 
> 
> The test behavior needs to be changed for the sblim case.
> 
> 1) If SBLIM:  Enum of HostSystem doesn't return any instances
> 2) If not SBLIM:  Enum of HostSystem returns a single instance
> 

  If Enum of HostSystem doesn't return any instances with sblim base 
provider installed,
  how to deal with Host* related test case? The association will return 
NULL through
  HostSystem such as HostedResourcePool forward query, then what should we 
do? 
 
  Thanks!

> If you take a look at the get_host() in Virt_HostSystem.c, you'll get an 

> understanding of how the providers determine whether a SBLIM instance is 

> available on the system.
> 
> Does this help?
> 
> -- 
> Kaitlin Rupert
> IBM Linux Technology Center
> kaitlin at linux.vnet.ibm.com
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Libvirt-cim mailing list
> Libvirt-cim at redhat.com
> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvirt-cim
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/libvirt-cim/attachments/20080917/ae4dd030/attachment.htm>