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)
• 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
• 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]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 4.01%. Comparing base (98f5663) to head (796ecb1).
Report is 33 commits behind head on main.

❗ There is a different number of reports uploaded between BASE (98f5663) and HEAD (796ecb1). Click for more details.

HEAD has 1 upload less than BASE

Flag	BASE (98f5663)	HEAD (796ecb1)
unittests	1	0

Additional details and impacted files

@@              Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #10098       +/-   ##
=============================================
- Coverage     16.19%    4.01%   -12.18%     
=============================================
  Files          5645      394     -5251     
  Lines        494567    32394   -462173     
  Branches      59955     5732    -54223     
=============================================
- Hits          80088     1301    -78787     
+ Misses       405642    30944   -374698     
+ Partials       8837      149     -8688     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	4.01% <ø> (-0.01%)	⬇️
unittests	?

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[github-actions]

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

[github-actions]

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