Send additional CPU data do SCC (jsc#SUMA-406)

[wweellddeerr]

What does this PR change?

It adds:

• A new Salt module for collecting CPU architecture-specific data for PowerPC (ppc64), ARM (arm64), and IBM Z (s390).
• A new column to store architecture-specific data as JSON in the rhnCPU table.

It changes:

• The hardware profile update to collect architecture-specific data through the newly added Salt module.
• The database trigger to consider the new column when flagging a system as needing SCC sync.
• SCC payload data to include CPU architecture-specific information.

GUI diff

No difference.

• [x] DONE

Documentation

• No documentation needed: add explanation. This can't be used if there is a GUI diff

• No documentation needed: only internal and user invisible changes

• Documentation issue was created: Link for SUSE Manager contributors, Link for community contributors.

• API documentation added: please review the Wiki page Writing Documentation for the API if you have any changes to API documentation.

• (OPTIONAL) Documentation PR

• [x] DONE

Test coverage

ℹ️ If a major new functionality is added, it is strongly recommended that tests for the new functionality are added to the Cucumber test suite

• No tests: add explanation

• No tests: already covered

• Unit tests were added

• Cucumber tests were added

• [x] DONE

Links

Issue(s): https://github.com/SUSE/spacewalk/issues/26031

• [x] DONE

Changelogs

Make sure the changelogs entries you are adding are compliant with https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/wiki/Contributing#changelogs and https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/wiki/Contributing#uyuni-projectuyuni-repository

If you don't need a changelog check, please mark this checkbox:

• [ ] No changelog needed

If you uncheck the checkbox after the PR is created, you will need to re-run changelog_test (see below)

Re-run a test

If you need to re-run a test, please mark the related checkbox, it will be unchecked automatically once it has re-run:

• [ ] Re-run test "changelog_test"
• [ ] Re-run test "backend_unittests_pgsql"
• [ ] Re-run test "java_pgsql_tests"
• [ ] Re-run test "schema_migration_test_pgsql"
• [ ] Re-run test "susemanager_unittests"
• [ ] Re-run test "javascript_lint"
• [ ] Re-run test "spacecmd_unittests"

Before you merge

Check How to branch and merge properly!

[github-actions[bot]]

:wave: Hello! Thanks for contributing to our project. Acceptance tests will take some time (aprox. 1h), please be patient :coffee:

You can see the progress at the end of this page and at https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/pull/9736/checks Once tests finish, if they fail, you can check :eyes: the cucumber report. See the link at the output of the action. You can also check the artifacts section, which contains the logs at https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/pull/9736/checks.

If you are unsure the failing tests are related to your code, you can check the "reference jobs". These are jobs that run on a scheduled time with code from master. If they fail for the same reason as your build, it means the tests or the infrastructure are broken. If they do not fail, but yours do, it means it is related to your code.

Reference tests:

• https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/actions/workflows/acceptance_tests_secondary_parallel.yml?query=event%3Aschedule

• https://github.com/uyuni-project/uyuni/actions/workflows/acceptance_tests_secondary.yml?query=event%3Aschedule

KNOWN ISSUES

Sometimes the build can fail when pulling new jar files from download.opensuse.org . This is a known limitation. Given this happens rarely, when it does, all you need to do is rerun the test. Sorry for the inconvenience.

For more tips on troubleshooting, see the troubleshooting guide.

Happy hacking! :warning: You should not merge if acceptance tests fail to pass. :warning:

[wweellddeerr]

Before taking a closer look at the code itself, I wonder why we need a new Salt module for information about the cpu. We already have a custom grains module cpuinfo.py, why couldn't we extend that? cpu information is static, it's a good fit for grains.

You're right, placing this in grains would be a better fit since CPU information is static. My reasoning for creating a new execution module was to minimize risk, as this change is exclusively for collecting data to send to SCC, and putting it as a grain could create issues in potential sensitive tasks of Salt. However, if extending cpuinfo.py grains module is the better approach from a Python/Salt perspective, I have no problem moving it there. What do you think, should I move it?

[agraul]

Before taking a closer look at the code itself, I wonder why we need a new Salt module for information about the cpu. We already have a custom grains module cpuinfo.py, why couldn't we extend that? cpu information is static, it's a good fit for grains.

You're right, placing this in grains would be a better fit since CPU information is static. My reasoning for creating a new execution module was to minimize risk, as this change is exclusively for collecting data to send to SCC, and putting it as a grain could create issues in potential sensitive tasks of Salt. However, if extending cpuinfo.py grains module is the better approach from a Python/Salt perspective, I have no problem moving it there. What do you think, should I move it?

I'd move it to the grains module. The only thing to keep in mind is that grains modules need to be run fast. Nothing I've seen in this module caught my eyes as a potential bottleneck. BTW, Salt has built-in functions that could be useful (e.g. a wrapper around open() and cmd.run instead of subprocess.run().

[wweellddeerr]

Just a heads-up: it's on me to rebase the changes with the master due to a major change in Hibernate mapping. I also need to apply the review suggestions on the Python side, including converting the execution module into a grains module, but it's on hold for now.

[github-actions[bot]]

This PR is stale because it has been open 60 days with no activity. Remove stale label or comment or this will be closed in 10 days.

[wweellddeerr]

I'd move it to the grains module. The only thing to keep in mind is that grains modules need to be run fast. Nothing I've seen in this module caught my eyes as a potential bottleneck. BTW, Salt has built-in functions that could be useful (e.g. a wrapper around open() and cmd.run instead of subprocess.run().

@agraul I’ve moved it to the grains module based on your initial review suggestion. Could we get a fresh review from the Python/Salt side on this PR?

[mcalmer]

@wweellddeerr and maybe you want to rebase it in master-staging?