MGMT-17438: bugfix, make sure ODF and LVM requirements do not change if MCE not selected

[rccrdpccl]

When selecting MCE and ODF we will add additional storage requirements to the operator singleton, which was never reset. This mean that if we install once MCE and ODF, all installations after that will keep additional requirements even if not necessary. This PR fixes this issue.

/cc @bkopilov @carbonin

List all the issues related to this PR

• New Feature
• Enhancement
• Bug fix
• Tests
• Documentation
• CI/CD

What environments does this code impact?

• Automation (CI, tools, etc)
• Cloud
• Operator Managed Deployments
• None

How was this code tested?

• assisted-test-infra environment
• dev-scripts environment
• Reviewer's test appreciated
• Waiting for CI to do a full test run
• Manual (Elaborate on how it was tested)
• No tests needed

Checklist

• Title and description added to both, commit and PR.
• Relevant issues have been associated (see CONTRIBUTING guide)
• This change does not require a documentation update (docstring, docs, README, etc)
• Does this change include unit-tests (note that code changes require unit-tests)

Reviewers Checklist

• Are the title and description (in both PR and commit) meaningful and clear?
• Is there a bug required (and linked) for this change?
• Should this PR be backported?

[openshift-ci-robot]

@rccrdpccl: This pull request references MGMT-17438 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.16.0" version, but no target version was set.

Details

In response to this:

When selecting MCE and ODF we will add additional storage requirements to the operator singleton, which was never reset. This mean that if we install once MCE and ODF, all installations after that will keep additional requirements even if not necessary. This PR fixes this issue.

/cc @bkopilov @carbonin

List all the issues related to this PR

• New Feature
• Enhancement
• Bug fix
• Tests
• Documentation
• CI/CD

What environments does this code impact?

• Automation (CI, tools, etc)
• Cloud
• Operator Managed Deployments
• None

How was this code tested?

• assisted-test-infra environment
• dev-scripts environment
• Reviewer's test appreciated
• Waiting for CI to do a full test run
• Manual (Elaborate on how it was tested)
• No tests needed

Checklist

• Title and description added to both, commit and PR.
• Relevant issues have been associated (see CONTRIBUTING guide)
• This change does not require a documentation update (docstring, docs, README, etc)
• Does this change include unit-tests (note that code changes require unit-tests)

Reviewers Checklist

• Are the title and description (in both PR and commit) meaningful and clear?
• Is there a bug required (and linked) for this change?
• Should this PR be backported?

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[openshift-ci]

@rccrdpccl: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: bkopilov.

Note that only openshift members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.

Details

In response to this:

When selecting MCE and ODF we will add additional storage requirements to the operator singleton, which was never reset. This mean that if we install once MCE and ODF, all installations after that will keep additional requirements even if not necessary. This PR fixes this issue.

/cc @bkopilov @carbonin

List all the issues related to this PR

• New Feature
• Enhancement
• Bug fix
• Tests
• Documentation
• CI/CD

What environments does this code impact?

• Automation (CI, tools, etc)
• Cloud
• Operator Managed Deployments
• None

How was this code tested?

• assisted-test-infra environment
• dev-scripts environment
• Reviewer's test appreciated
• Waiting for CI to do a full test run
• Manual (Elaborate on how it was tested)
• No tests needed

Checklist

• Title and description added to both, commit and PR.
• Relevant issues have been associated (see CONTRIBUTING guide)
• This change does not require a documentation update (docstring, docs, README, etc)
• Does this change include unit-tests (note that code changes require unit-tests)

Reviewers Checklist

• Are the title and description (in both PR and commit) meaningful and clear?
• Is there a bug required (and linked) for this change?
• Should this PR be backported?

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 73.07692% with 7 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 68.32%. Comparing base (d3dd289) to head (1f40608).
Report is 2 commits behind head on master.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##           master    #6150   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   68.31%   68.32%           
=======================================
  Files         242      242           
  Lines       35817    35824    +7     
=======================================
+ Hits        24470    24475    +5     
+ Misses       9221     9219    -2     
- Partials     2126     2130    +4     

Files	Coverage Δ
internal/operators/cnv/cnv_operator.go	79.65% <100.00%> (ø)
internal/operators/manager.go	78.07% <100.00%> (+1.65%)	⬆️
internal/operators/mce/mce_operator.go	71.55% <100.00%> (ø)
internal/operators/odf/validations.go	97.61% <100.00%> (ø)
internal/operators/lso/ls_operator.go	9.52% <0.00%> (ø)
internal/operators/odf/odf_operator.go	63.33% <81.81%> (+0.24%)	⬆️
internal/operators/lvm/lvm_operator.go	76.63% <42.85%> (-3.56%)	⬇️

... and 3 files with indirect coverage changes

[carbonin]

we will add additional storage requirements to the operator singleton, which was never reset

It feels to me like the answer isn't to reset this, but to not do it in the first place. Is that an option?
If we have some kind of global for these operators then that's bad enough, but trying to edit and reset data on them without any kind of sync mechanism is worse.

[rccrdpccl]

we will add additional storage requirements to the operator singleton, which was never reset

It feels to me like the answer isn't to reset this, but to not do it in the first place. Is that an option? If we have some kind of global for these operators then that's bad enough, but trying to edit and reset data on them without any kind of sync mechanism is worse.

I'll try to think something, the main issue is that I do not want to make aware MCE (or any other operator) of other operators, that would cause a mess of dependencies.

[rccrdpccl]

The change aims to pass to additional requirements when that can be understood only from the manager when validating the hosts. In this instance the additional disk requirement is only when a combinations of operators are activated.
As each operator is not aware of the others, only the manager can issue additional requirements.

[carbonin]

Looks good other than that name.

[carbonin]

Maybe name this just additionalOperatorRequirements?
I could see this being useful for other runtime stuff that might come up.

[openshift-ci]

@rccrdpccl: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: carbonin, rccrdpccl

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [carbonin,rccrdpccl]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

[openshift-bot]

[ART PR BUILD NOTIFIER]

This PR has been included in build ose-agent-installer-api-server-container-v4.16.0-202404051041.p0.g484ec5c.assembly.stream.el8 for distgit ose-agent-installer-api-server.
All builds following this will include this PR.

[rccrdpccl]

/cherry-pick cloud_hotfix_releases

[openshift-cherrypick-robot]

@rccrdpccl: new pull request created: #6160

Details

In response to this:

/cherry-pick cloud_hotfix_releases

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.