Guest OS rules

[BryanMLima]

Description

Currently, ACS provides a feature that enables a guest OS preference for a specific host, prioritizing VMs based on its OS. However, this functionality allows VMs with different OSes to be deployed in a host with a Guest OS defined, as expected as it is only a preference configuration; this is not always desired. For example, keeping proprietary OS in the same host could reduce licensing costs.

This PR tackles this scenario, allowing JavaScript rules, using the JS interpreter introduced in #5909, to direct VMs to specific hosts based on their OS. Different from the guest OS preference, these guest OS rules will be strict. This new feature added a new field, Guest OS as JS rule in the host edit view to allow users the creation of these rules.

This PR depends on #9074, for this reason it is on draft until #9074 is merged.

Types of changes

• [ ] Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• [x] New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• [ ] Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• [ ] Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
• [ ] Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
• [ ] build/CI
• [ ] test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

• [ ] Major
• [x] Minor

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

In a local lab with two hosts (host-1 and host-2) I created the guest OS rule vmGuestOs.toLowerCase().indexOf("debian") != -1 for host-2, and deployed multiple VMs using templates and ISOs.

• I deployed VMs with Ubuntu and CentOS and verify that host-2 was filtered during the deployment.
• I tried to migrate these VMs to host-2 and verified that it was not possible.
• I deployed a Debian VM and verified that both hosts were considered in the deployment process.
• I managed to migrate this VM from host-1 to host-2 and vice versa.

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

I tried to deploy VMs in the same lab without the guest OS rules defined and validated that the deployment of VMs were being done as expected.

[codecov[bot]]

Codecov Report

:x: Patch coverage is 52.18447% with 197 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review. :white_check_mark: Project coverage is 17.70%. Comparing base (11455f6) to head (ee9c893). :warning: Report is 8 commits behind head on main.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...n/java/com/cloud/resource/ResourceManagerImpl.java	0.00%	47 Missing :warning:
...om/cloud/deploy/DeploymentPlanningManagerImpl.java	14.70%	28 Missing and 1 partial :warning:
...gent/manager/allocator/impl/FirstFitAllocator.java	79.71%	24 Missing and 4 partials :warning:
.../src/main/java/com/cloud/host/dao/HostDaoImpl.java	0.00%	22 Missing and 1 partial :warning:
...udstack/utils/jsinterpreter/GenericRuleHelper.java	31.81%	14 Missing and 1 partial :warning:
...ud/agent/manager/allocator/impl/BaseAllocator.java	70.83%	14 Missing :warning:
server/src/main/java/com/cloud/api/ApiDBUtils.java	0.00%	7 Missing :warning:
...g/apache/cloudstack/api/response/HostResponse.java	0.00%	6 Missing :warning:
.../agent/manager/allocator/impl/RandomAllocator.java	89.28%	6 Missing :warning:
.../cloud/configuration/ConfigurationManagerImpl.java	0.00%	3 Missing and 1 partial :warning:
... and 9 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #10098      +/-   ##
============================================
+ Coverage     17.66%   17.70%   +0.03%     
- Complexity    14063    14109      +46     
============================================
  Files          5307     5309       +2     
  Lines        473814   473854      +40     
  Branches      55637    55602      -35     
============================================
+ Hits          83715    83901     +186     
+ Misses       380774   380636     -138     
+ Partials       9325     9317       -8     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	17.70% <52.18%> (+0.03%)	:arrow_up:

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

:umbrella: View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
:loudspeaker: Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

:rocket: New features to boost your workflow:

• :snowflake: Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
• :package: JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch.

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch.

[sureshanaparti]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@sureshanaparti a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✖️ el8 ✖️ el9 ✖️ debian ✖️ suse15. SL-JID 13624

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✖️ el8 ✖️ el9 ✖️ debian ✖️ suse15. SL-JID 13720

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✖️ el8 ✖️ el9 ✖️ debian ✖️ suse15. SL-JID 13731

[DaanHoogland]

@BryanMLima can you look at the conflicts?

[BryanMLima]

@BryanMLima can you look at the conflicts?

I will take a look this week, apologies for disappearing :sweat_smile: .

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch.

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch.

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch.

[github-actions[bot]]

This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch.