vmware: do not tear down vm disks if deploy-as-is vm has vm snapshots

[weizhouapache]

Description

This PR fixes #9180

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

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Feature/Enhancement Scale

• Major
• Minor

Bug Severity

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

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

[weizhouapache]

@blueorangutan package

[weizhouapache]

@nvazquez @harikrishna-patnala
I have no idea why the data disks are tear down when start a deploy-as-is vm.
Anyway, this change seems to be working.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 14.96%. Comparing base (19e9020) to head (f4d95fc).
Report is 2 commits behind head on 4.19.

Files	Patch %	Lines
...oud/hypervisor/vmware/resource/VmwareResource.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               4.19    #9243      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     14.96%   14.96%   -0.01%     
  Complexity    11015    11015              
============================================
  Files          5377     5377              
  Lines        469605   469605              
  Branches      60258    58877    -1381     
============================================
- Hits          70296    70292       -4     
- Misses       391523   391528       +5     
+ Partials       7786     7785       -1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	4.29% <ø> (ø)
unittests	15.68% <0.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

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.

[sureshanaparti]

clgtm, not tested

[weizhouapache]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@weizhouapache 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]: ✔️ el7 ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 9924

[harikrishna-patnala]

This seems right to me as I see some other calls of tearDownVmDevices() method before this call which does handle snapshot existance.
https://github.com/shapeblue/cloudstack/blob/78e07cff62dd98d9b88852a47407e80fa57537d2/plugins/hypervisors/vmware/src/main/java/com/cloud/hypervisor/vmware/resource/VmwareResource.java#L2826-L2834

private void tearDownVmDevices(VirtualMachineMO vmMo, boolean hasSnapshot, boolean deployAsIs) throws Exception {
    if (deployAsIs) {
        vmMo.tearDownDevices(new Class<?>[]{VirtualEthernetCard.class});
    } else if (!hasSnapshot) {
        vmMo.tearDownDevices(new Class<?>[]{VirtualDisk.class, VirtualEthernetCard.class});
    } else {
        vmMo.tearDownDevices(new Class<?>[]{VirtualEthernetCard.class});
    }
}

[weizhouapache]

thanks @harikrishna-patnala
It looks consistent with this pr.

I got the error on vcenter: " Invalid configuration for device '0'. Cannot remove virtual disk from the virtual machine because it or one of its parent disks is part of a snapshot of the virtual machine."
it seems to be a known restriction that disk cannot be removed from vm with snapshot.

[harikrishna-patnala]

Code LGTM, needs testing though

[nvazquez]

Code LGTM - subject to testing

[weizhouapache]

Thanks @harikrishna-patnala @nvazquez

@blueorangutan test rocky8 vmware-80

[blueorangutan]

@weizhouapache a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (rocky8 mgmt + vmware-80) has been kicked to run smoke tests

[blueorangutan]

[SF] Trillian Build Failed (tid-10434)

[blueorangutan]

[SF] Trillian test result (tid-10436)
Environment: vmware-80 (x2), Advanced Networking with Mgmt server r8
Total time taken: 54822 seconds
Marvin logs: https://github.com/blueorangutan/acs-prs/releases/download/trillian/pr9243-t10436-vmware-80.zip
Smoke tests completed. 128 look OK, 3 have errors, 0 did not run
Only failed and skipped tests results shown below:

Test	Result	Time (s)	Test File
test_02_balanced_drs_algorithm	Failure	139.48	test_cluster_drs.py
test_01_create_lb_rule_src_nat	Error	118.97	test_loadbalance.py
test_02_create_lb_rule_non_nat	Error	223.67	test_loadbalance.py
test_02_create_lb_rule_non_nat	Error	223.68	test_loadbalance.py
test_assign_and_removal_lb	Error	0.12	test_loadbalance.py
test_01_redundant_vpc_site2site_vpn	Error	628.24	test_vpc_vpn.py

[rajujith]

LGTM.
Followed the repro steps in the corresponding issue and the PR fixes it. I can start an instance with data volume having instance snapshots.