Skip to content

Remove Ovm/Ovm3 leftovers from core code - #14555

Open
DaanHoogland wants to merge 1 commit into
removeHypervfrom
removeOvmLeftovers
Open

DaanHoogland wants to merge 1 commit into
removeHypervfrom
removeOvmLeftovers

Conversation

@DaanHoogland

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Depends on #14554

Description

Second PR of the stack: removes the Ovm/Ovm3 leftovers from core code. The plugins have not been built since #11196 ("ovm deprecation"). Based on the Hyper-V removal PR; review only the last commit.

Behaviour / API changes

  • Traffic type responses no longer include ovm3networklabel. The ovm3networklabel request parameter is @Deprecated and ignored.
  • Removed the settings router.template.ovm3, ovm.{public,private,guest}.network.device, ovm3.{public,private,guest,storage}.network.device, ovm3.heartbeat.timeout and ovm3.heartbeat.interval. schema-42300to2400.sql deletes them.
  • The hypervisor.list default no longer contains Ovm/Ovm3. LXC stays: an earlier version of this change dropped it by mistake.
  • Ovm/Ovm3 are removed from the live-migration and storage-pool hypervisor lists, the system VM template registration, templateConfig.sh, the download-ovm-systemvm-template profile and package.sh.

Deliberately kept: HypervisorType.Ovm/Ovm3, for the same DB-compatibility reason as Hyperv. Also kept: historic upgrade paths, and the remaining Ovm branches in VolumeOrchestrator, StorageManagerImpl, OCFS2ManagerImpl, SnapshotManagerImpl and ResourceManagerImpl (possible follow-ups).

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)

How Has This Been Tested?

Unit tests updated: ApiResponseHelperTest, SystemVmTemplateRegistrationTest, ManagementServerImplTest.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

@codecov

codecov Bot commented Nov 2, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 20.00000% with 8 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 20.86%. Comparing base (2431feb) to head (24e830a).

Files with missing lines Patch % Lines
.../src/main/java/com/cloud/vm/UserVmManagerImpl.java 0.00% 4 Missing ⚠️
...ack/api/command/admin/usage/AddTrafficTypeCmd.java 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
.../api/command/admin/usage/UpdateTrafficTypeCmd.java 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
...in/java/com/cloud/server/ManagementServerImpl.java 66.66% 1 Missing ⚠️
...com/cloud/storage/listener/StoragePoolMonitor.java 0.00% 0 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@                Coverage Diff                 @@
##             removeHyperv   #14555      +/-   ##
==================================================
- Coverage           20.86%   20.86%   -0.01%     
- Complexity          21913    21914       +1     
==================================================
  Files                6470     6470              
  Lines              589106   589062      -44     
  Branches            72228    72219       -9     
==================================================
- Hits               122900   122879      -21     
+ Misses             452869   452845      -24     
- Partials            13337    13338       +1     
Flag Coverage Δ
uitests 3.88% <ø> (ø)
unittests 22.18% <20.00%> (-0.01%) ⬇️

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

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

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
  • ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.
  • 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Nov 2, 2026 •

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔴 Test Coverage Grade: D — Marginal

Metric Value
Line coverage 26.03%
Branch coverage 20.31%

Grade Scale

Grade Line Coverage Meaning
🟢 A ≥ 80% Excellent - this code sleeps well at night 😴
🟡 B 60-79% Good - almost there, don't stop now 😉
🟠 C 40-59% Acceptable - your code is wearing a seatbelt, but no airbags 😬
🔴 D 20-39% Marginal - boldly shipping where no test has gone before 🖖
⛔ F < 20% Failing - tests? what tests? 🔥

Branch coverage is shown as a secondary signal. Grade is determined by line coverage.
View full Actions run

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 5.5 <noreply@anthropic.com>
Copilot AI balanced review requested due to automatic review settings November 3, 2026 14:27

Copilot AI left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Copilot was unable to review this pull request because the user who requested the review has insufficient remaining quota. Try requesting a review at a lower effort level.

@sonarqubecloud

sonarqubecloud Bot commented Nov 3, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

This branch has not been deployed

No deployments
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants