Here are the short logs on failures.

I would suggest running cimtest with latest upstream + patches on list and make sure that these patches are not breaking existing tests.
In general, before posting any patch, complete cimtest should be run and it should be verified that new patch is not breaking any cimtest.

++++++++++++++++

VirtualSystemManagementService - 09_procrasd_persist.py: FAIL
ERROR - Got CIM error CIM_ERR_FAILED: ResourceSettings Error: VirtualDevice property must be unique for each DiskResourceAllocationSettingData in a single guest with return code 1
ERROR - Unable to define procrasd_persist_dom
InvokeMethod(DefineSystem): CIM_ERR_FAILED: ResourceSettings Error: VirtualDevice property must be unique for each DiskResourceAllocationSettingData in a single guest


VirtualSystemManagementService - 11_define_memrasdunits.py: FAIL
ERROR - Got CIM error CIM_ERR_FAILED: ResourceSettings Error: VirtualDevice property must be unique for each DiskResourceAllocationSettingData in a single guest with return code 1
ERROR - DefineSystem with (KiloBytes) units failed
InvokeMethod(DefineSystem): CIM_ERR_FAILED: ResourceSettings Error: VirtualDevice property must be unique for each DiskResourceAllocationSettingData in a single guest


VirtualSystemManagementService - 31_unset_netrasd.py: FAIL
ERROR - Current 'virtio' and expected '' ResourceSubType differ


VirtualSystemManagementService - 32_modify_cdrom_media.py: FAIL
ERROR - New media '/dev/null' does not match expected ''
ERROR - TypeError : 'NoneType' object is unsubscriptable
Traceback (most recent call last):
File "/home/cimtest/suites/libvirt-cim/lib/XenKvmLib/const.py", line 141, in do_try
rc = f()
File "32_modify_cdrom_media.py", line 223, in main
inst = modify_media(cim, inst, media_path)
File "32_modify_cdrom_media.py", line 114, in modify_media
val = set_device_addr(inst, addr)
File "32_modify_cdrom_media.py", line 97, in set_device_addr
inst["InstanceID"],
TypeError: 'NoneType' object is unsubscriptable
ERROR - None


VirtualSystemManagementService - 08_modifyresource.py: FAIL
ERROR - (4, u'CIM_ERR_INVALID_PARAMETER: Missing InstanceID in RASD')
ERROR - Error invoking ModifyRS: mod_disk_res
ERROR - ModifyResourceSettings call failed
InvokeMethod(ModifyResourceSettings): CIM_ERR_INVALID_PARAMETER: Missing InstanceID in RASD



Sharad Mishra
Open Virtualization
Linux Technology Center
IBM

"Eduardo Lima (Etrunko)" <eblima@linux.vnet.ibm.com> wrote on 10/27/2011 10:42:17 AM:

> "Eduardo Lima (Etrunko)" <eblima@linux.vnet.ibm.com>
> 10/27/2011 10:42 AM
>
> Please respond to
> eblima@br.ibm.com
>
> To
>
> List for discussion and development of libvirt CIM <libvirt-cim@redhat.com>
>
> cc
>
> Sharad Mishra/Beaverton/IBM@IBMUS, eblima@br.ibm.com
>
> Subject
>
> Re: [Libvirt-cim] cimtest results.
>
> On 10/27/2011 12:54 PM, Sharad Mishra wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10/26/2011 08:07 PM, snmishra@us.ibm.com wrote:
> >> > Hi,
> >> >
> >> > I see bunch of tests failing after I get cimtest from upstream and apply
> >> > the following patches -
> >> >
> >> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvirt-cim/2011-October/msg00051.html
> >> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvirt-cim/2011-October/msg00052.html
> >> > https://www.redhat.com/archives/libvirt-cim/2011-October/msg00045.html
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > If I run cimtest from rev 879 (which is upstream minus latest 4 patches)
> >> > and compare the results with the run using latest upstream plus above
> >> > three patches I see following extra failures -
> >> >
> >> > VirtualSystemManagementService - 08_modifyresource.py: FAIL
> >> > VirtualSystemManagementService - 09_procrasd_persist.py: FAIL
> >> > VirtualSystemManagementService - 11_define_memrasdunits.py: FAIL
> >> > VirtualSystemManagementService - 31_unset_netrasd.py: FAIL
> >> > VirtualSystemManagementService - 32_modify_cdrom_media.py: FAIL
> >> > KVMRedirectionSAP - 01_enum_KVMredSAP.py: FAIL
> >> >
> >> > I understand that 31_* and 32_* are new tests and that is the reason I
> >> > did not see them in my run with older rev. But we need to figure out why
> >> > these tests are failing.
> >> >
> >>
> >> The buggy patch is 883 ([TEST] XenKvmLib: Add cdrom device description
> >> to domain) and it looks weird that you actually ran revision 879 as it
> >> should not include VSMS 31 and 32. Can you try again with revision 882?
> >
> > When I wrote "older rev" above, I meant rev 879.
> > I did not see 31_ and 32_ in rev 879 and that is understandable since
> > those tests were added in later rev.
> > I am trying to understand why above tests are failing with 883 + cimtest
> > patches on list (the three I pointed out above)?
>
> So you are saying that in rev 879 the other tests (08, 09 and 11) pass?
> And can you provide the log when they fail?
>
> Best regards, Eduardo.
>
> --
> Eduardo de Barros Lima
> Software Engineer, Open Virtualization
> Linux Technology Center - IBM/Brazil
> eblima@br.ibm.com
>