[PATCH] [TEST] #2 Fix potiential false positive in AC 01
# HG changeset patch # User Kaitlin Rupert <karupert@us.ibm.com> # Date 1216502229 25200 # Node ID de486893703609719ea79d53ee64828537826211 # Parent 3703b7be5a107c67e901546978e974546b3d5562 [TEST] #2 Fix potiential false positive in AC 01. This test needs to verify enum of AC returns the same number of instances as the number of instances returned by enum of MemoryPool + ProcessorPool + DiskPool + NetworkPool. Also, cleaned up the logic to verify that the ResourceType and the InstanceIDs of the AC instances match the Pool instances they're describing. Updates form 1 to 2: -Create a disk pool and network pool to ensure there is an instance for each pool type. -Add comment explaining the purpose of the test. Signed-off-by: Kaitlin Rupert <karupert@us.ibm.com> diff -r 3703b7be5a10 -r de4868937036 suites/libvirt-cim/cimtest/AllocationCapabilities/01_enum.py --- a/suites/libvirt-cim/cimtest/AllocationCapabilities/01_enum.py Wed Jul 16 07:23:32 2008 -0700 +++ b/suites/libvirt-cim/cimtest/AllocationCapabilities/01_enum.py Sat Jul 19 14:17:09 2008 -0700 @@ -20,63 +20,97 @@ # License along with this library; if not, write to the Free Software # Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA # +# This test verifies the enum of AC returns the same number of instances as +# the number of instances returned by enum of: +# MemoryPool + ProcessorPool + DiskPool + NetworkPool. +# import sys +from VirtLib.live import virsh_version from XenKvmLib import enumclass from CimTest.Globals import do_main from CimTest.Globals import logger, CIM_ERROR_ENUMERATE, platform_sup from CimTest.ReturnCodes import PASS, FAIL +from XenKvmLib.common_util import cleanup_restore, create_diskpool_conf, \ + create_netpool_conf, destroy_netpool sup_types = ['Xen', 'KVM', 'XenFV', 'LXC'] + +def enum_pools_and_ac(ip, virt, cn): + pools = {} + ac = [] + + pt = ['MemoryPool', 'ProcessorPool', 'DiskPool', 'NetworkPool'] + + try: + key = ["InstanceID"] + ac = enumclass.enumerate(ip, cn, key, virt) + + for p in pt: + enum_list = enumclass.enumerate(ip, p, key, virt) + + if len(enum_list) < 1: + logger.error("%s did not return any instances" % p) + return pools, ac + + for pool in enum_list: + pools[pool.InstanceID] = pool + + except Exception, details: + logger.error(CIM_ERROR_ENUMERATE, cn) + logger.error(details) + return pools, ac + + if len(ac) != len(pools): + logger.error("%s returned %s instances, expected %s" % (cn, len(ac), + len(pools))) + return pools, ac + +def compare_pool_to_ac(ac, pools, cn): + try: + for inst in ac: + id = inst.InstanceID + if pools[id].ResourceType != inst.ResourceType: + logger.error("%s ResourceType %s, Pool ResourceType %s" % (cn, + inst.ResourceType, pools[id].ResourceType)) + return FAIL + + except Exception, details: + logger.error("%s returned instance with unexpected InstanceID %s" % (cn, + details)) + return FAIL + + return PASS + @do_main(sup_types) def main(): options = main.options - pools = {} - pt = ['MemoryPool', 'ProcessorPool', 'DiskPool', 'NetworkPool'] - try: - key_list = ["InstanceID"] - ac = enumclass.enumerate(options.ip, - "AllocationCapabilities", - key_list, - options.virt) - pools['MemoryPool'] = enumclass.enumerate(options.ip, - "MemoryPool", - key_list, - options.virt) - pools['ProcessorPool'] = enumclass.enumerate(options.ip, - "ProcessorPool", - key_list, - options.virt) - pools['DiskPool'] = enumclass.enumerate(options.ip, - "DiskPool", - key_list, - options.virt) - pools['NetworkPool'] = enumclass.enumerate(options.ip, - "NetworkPool", - key_list, - options.virt) - except Exception: - logger.error(CIM_ERROR_ENUMERATE, '%s_AllocationCapabilities' % options.virt) - return FAIL - - acset = set([(x.InstanceID, x.ResourceType) for x in ac]) - poolset = set() - for pl in pools.values(): - for x in pl: - poolset.add((x.InstanceID, x.ResourceType)) + cn = 'AllocationCapabilities' - if len(acset) != len(poolset): - logger.error( - 'AllocationCapabilities return %i instances, excepted %i' - % (ac_size, pool_size)) - return FAIL - zeroset = acset - poolset - if len(zeroset) != 0: - logger.error('AC is inconsistent with pools') + status, diskid = create_diskpool_conf(options.ip, options.virt) + if status != PASS: + cleanup_restore(options.ip, options.virt) + return FAIL + + status, test_network = create_netpool_conf(options.ip, options.virt) + if status != PASS: + cleanup_restore(options.ip, options.virt) + destroy_netpool(options.ip, options.virt, test_network) + return FAIL + + pools, ac = enum_pools_and_ac(options.ip, options.virt, cn) + if len(pools) < 1: + cleanup_restore(options.ip, options.virt) + destroy_netpool(options.ip, options.virt, test_network) return FAIL - return PASS + status = compare_pool_to_ac(ac, pools, cn) + + cleanup_restore(options.ip, options.virt) + destroy_netpool(options.ip, options.virt, test_network) + + return status if __name__ == "__main__": sys.exit(main())
Kaitlin Rupert wrote:
# HG changeset patch # User Kaitlin Rupert <karupert@us.ibm.com> # Date 1216502229 25200 # Node ID de486893703609719ea79d53ee64828537826211 # Parent 3703b7be5a107c67e901546978e974546b3d5562 [TEST] #2 Fix potiential false positive in AC 01.
This test needs to verify enum of AC returns the same number of instances as the number of instances returned by enum of MemoryPool + ProcessorPool + DiskPool + NetworkPool.
Also, cleaned up the logic to verify that the ResourceType and the InstanceIDs of the AC instances match the Pool instances they're describing.
Updates form 1 to 2: -Create a disk pool and network pool to ensure there is an instance for each pool type. -Add comment explaining the purpose of the test.
Signed-off-by: Kaitlin Rupert <karupert@us.ibm.com>
diff -r 3703b7be5a10 -r de4868937036 suites/libvirt-cim/cimtest/AllocationCapabilities/01_enum.py --- a/suites/libvirt-cim/cimtest/AllocationCapabilities/01_enum.py Wed Jul 16 07:23:32 2008 -0700 +++ b/suites/libvirt-cim/cimtest/AllocationCapabilities/01_enum.py Sat Jul 19 14:17:09 2008 -0700 @@ -20,63 +20,97 @@ # License along with this library; if not, write to the Free Software # Foundation, Inc., 59 Temple Place, Suite 330, Boston, MA 02111-1307 USA # +# This test verifies the enum of AC returns the same number of instances as +# the number of instances returned by enum of: +# MemoryPool + ProcessorPool + DiskPool + NetworkPool. +#
import sys +from VirtLib.live import virsh_version from XenKvmLib import enumclass from CimTest.Globals import do_main from CimTest.Globals import logger, CIM_ERROR_ENUMERATE, platform_sup from CimTest.ReturnCodes import PASS, FAIL +from XenKvmLib.common_util import cleanup_restore, create_diskpool_conf, \ + create_netpool_conf, destroy_netpool
sup_types = ['Xen', 'KVM', 'XenFV', 'LXC'] + +def enum_pools_and_ac(ip, virt, cn): + pools = {} + ac = [] + + pt = ['MemoryPool', 'ProcessorPool', 'DiskPool', 'NetworkPool'] + + try: + key = ["InstanceID"] + ac = enumclass.enumerate(ip, cn, key, virt) + + for p in pt: + enum_list = enumclass.enumerate(ip, p, key, virt) + + if len(enum_list) < 1: + logger.error("%s did not return any instances" % p) + return pools, ac + + for pool in enum_list: + pools[pool.InstanceID] = pool + + except Exception, details: + logger.error(CIM_ERROR_ENUMERATE, cn) + logger.error(details) + return pools, ac + + if len(ac) != len(pools): + logger.error("%s returned %s instances, expected %s" % (cn, len(ac), + len(pools))) + return pools, ac + +def compare_pool_to_ac(ac, pools, cn): + try: + for inst in ac: + id = inst.InstanceID + if pools[id].ResourceType != inst.ResourceType: + logger.error("%s ResourceType %s, Pool ResourceType %s" % (cn, + inst.ResourceType, pools[id].ResourceType)) + return FAIL + + except Exception, details: + logger.error("%s returned instance with unexpected InstanceID %s" % (cn, + details)) + return FAIL + + return PASS + @do_main(sup_types) def main(): options = main.options
- pools = {} - pt = ['MemoryPool', 'ProcessorPool', 'DiskPool', 'NetworkPool'] - try: - key_list = ["InstanceID"] - ac = enumclass.enumerate(options.ip, - "AllocationCapabilities", - key_list, - options.virt) - pools['MemoryPool'] = enumclass.enumerate(options.ip, - "MemoryPool", - key_list, - options.virt) - pools['ProcessorPool'] = enumclass.enumerate(options.ip, - "ProcessorPool", - key_list, - options.virt) - pools['DiskPool'] = enumclass.enumerate(options.ip, - "DiskPool", - key_list, - options.virt) - pools['NetworkPool'] = enumclass.enumerate(options.ip, - "NetworkPool", - key_list, - options.virt) - except Exception: - logger.error(CIM_ERROR_ENUMERATE, '%s_AllocationCapabilities' % options.virt) - return FAIL - - acset = set([(x.InstanceID, x.ResourceType) for x in ac]) - poolset = set() - for pl in pools.values(): - for x in pl: - poolset.add((x.InstanceID, x.ResourceType)) + cn = 'AllocationCapabilities'
- if len(acset) != len(poolset): - logger.error( - 'AllocationCapabilities return %i instances, excepted %i' - % (ac_size, pool_size)) - return FAIL - zeroset = acset - poolset - if len(zeroset) != 0: - logger.error('AC is inconsistent with pools') + status, diskid = create_diskpool_conf(options.ip, options.virt) + if status != PASS: + cleanup_restore(options.ip, options.virt) + return FAIL + + status, test_network = create_netpool_conf(options.ip, options.virt) + if status != PASS: + cleanup_restore(options.ip, options.virt) + destroy_netpool(options.ip, options.virt, test_network) + return FAIL + + pools, ac = enum_pools_and_ac(options.ip, options.virt, cn) + if len(pools) < 1: + cleanup_restore(options.ip, options.virt) + destroy_netpool(options.ip, options.virt, test_network) return FAIL
I think the check used in the prev patch, len(ac) != len(pools) is better and also we should be checking len(ac) != 4 to make sure that AC values == enum of MemoryPool + ProcessorPool + DiskPool + NetworkPool. Any specific reason for not doing this ? otherwise +1 for me. Thanks and Regards, Deepti.
- return PASS + status = compare_pool_to_ac(ac, pools, cn) + + cleanup_restore(options.ip, options.virt) + destroy_netpool(options.ip, options.virt, test_network) + + return status
if __name__ == "__main__": sys.exit(main())
_______________________________________________ Libvirt-cim mailing list Libvirt-cim@redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/libvirt-cim
+def enum_pools_and_ac(ip, virt, cn): + pools = {} + ac = [] + + pt = ['MemoryPool', 'ProcessorPool', 'DiskPool', 'NetworkPool'] + + try: + key = ["InstanceID"] + ac = enumclass.enumerate(ip, cn, key, virt) + + for p in pt: + enum_list = enumclass.enumerate(ip, p, key, virt) + + if len(enum_list) < 1: + logger.error("%s did not return any instances" % p) + return pools, ac + + for pool in enum_list: + pools[pool.InstanceID] = pool + + except Exception, details: + logger.error(CIM_ERROR_ENUMERATE, cn) + logger.error(details) + return pools, ac + + if len(ac) != len(pools): + logger.error("%s returned %s instances, expected %s" % (cn, len(ac), + len(pools))) + return pools, ac +
enum_pools_and_ac(options.ip, options.virt, cn) + if len(pools) < 1: + cleanup_restore(options.ip, options.virt) + destroy_netpool(options.ip, options.virt, test_network) return FAIL
I think the check used in the prev patch, len(ac) != len(pools) is better
This check is still here - it's included in the enum_pools_and_ac() function. See the piece quoted above. It can be moved outside of this function to help with clarity. and also we should be checking len(ac) != 4 to make sure that AC
values == enum of MemoryPool + ProcessorPool + DiskPool + NetworkPool. Any specific reason for not doing this ? otherwise +1 for me.
You can't guarantee 4 pools. The test creates a disk pool and a network pool, but it's possible for additional net and disk pools to exist on the system. That's why you want to check len(ac) != len(pools). -- Kaitlin Rupert IBM Linux Technology Center kaitlin@linux.vnet.ibm.com
Kaitlin Rupert wrote:
+def enum_pools_and_ac(ip, virt, cn): + pools = {} + ac = [] + + pt = ['MemoryPool', 'ProcessorPool', 'DiskPool', 'NetworkPool'] + + try: + key = ["InstanceID"] + ac = enumclass.enumerate(ip, cn, key, virt) + + for p in pt: + enum_list = enumclass.enumerate(ip, p, key, virt) + + if len(enum_list) < 1: + logger.error("%s did not return any instances" % p) + return pools, ac + + for pool in enum_list: + pools[pool.InstanceID] = pool + + except Exception, details: + logger.error(CIM_ERROR_ENUMERATE, cn) + logger.error(details) + return pools, ac + + if len(ac) != len(pools): + logger.error("%s returned %s instances, expected %s" % (cn, len(ac), + len(pools))) + return pools, ac +
enum_pools_and_ac(options.ip, options.virt, cn) + if len(pools) < 1: + cleanup_restore(options.ip, options.virt) + destroy_netpool(options.ip, options.virt, test_network) return FAIL I think the check used in the prev patch, len(ac) != len(pools) is better
This check is still here - it's included in the enum_pools_and_ac() function. See the piece quoted above.
It can be moved outside of this function to help with clarity.
and also we should be checking len(ac) != 4 to make sure that AC
values == enum of MemoryPool + ProcessorPool + DiskPool + NetworkPool. Any specific reason for not doing this ? otherwise +1 for me.
You can't guarantee 4 pools. The test creates a disk pool and a network pool, but it's possible for additional net and disk pools to exist on the system. That's why you want to check len(ac) != len(pools).
yes I missed this scenario. yes we shld be checking for len(ac) is atleast 4 and not less than that since we are sure atleast 1 processorpool + 1 memorypool + atleast 1 networkpool + atleast 1 diskpool will exist. Thanks and Regards, Deepti.
It can be moved outside of this function to help with clarity.
and also we should be checking len(ac) != 4 to make sure that AC
values == enum of MemoryPool + ProcessorPool + DiskPool + NetworkPool. Any specific reason for not doing this ? otherwise +1 for me.
You can't guarantee 4 pools. The test creates a disk pool and a network pool, but it's possible for additional net and disk pools to exist on the system. That's why you want to check len(ac) != len(pools).
yes I missed this scenario. yes we shld be checking for len(ac) is atleast 4 and not less than that since we are sure atleast 1 processorpool + 1 memorypool + atleast 1 networkpool + atleast 1 diskpool will exist.
Yep, that makes sense! Will send a new patch =) -- Kaitlin Rupert IBM Linux Technology Center kaitlin@linux.vnet.ibm.com
participants (2)
-
Deepti B Kalakeri -
Kaitlin Rupert