OCPVE-622: chore: remove deviceMinAge due to imperfect validation

[jakobmoellerdev]

This removes deviceMinAge as it is not a reliable way to filter devices created by other entities.

Case to cover:
Device is freshly attached by another entity and should not be picked up by LVM Operator

Reason it doesn't work:

1. Device is attached at t0
2. Device is looked up LVM Operator at t1
3. External entity does not lookup Device in t0+30s
4. Device is viewed as available by LVM operator at t1+30s and gets used anyhow

On top of this, if a device gets created and used by LVM, LVM puts a system lock in place so there cannot ever be concurrent calls to LVM. This makes this condition uninteresting and we can remove minDeviceAge

[openshift-ci-robot]

@jakobmoellerdev: This pull request references OCPVE-622 which is a valid jira issue.

In response to this:

This removes deviceMinAge as it is not a reliable way to filter devices created by other entities.

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.

[openshift-ci]

Skipping CI for Draft Pull Request.
If you want CI signal for your change, please convert it to an actual PR.
You can still manually trigger a test run with /test all

[jakobmoellerdev]

/test all

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Merging #380 (e180edf) into main (a962b90) will increase coverage by 40.47%.
Report is 12 commits behind head on main.
The diff coverage is 75.64%.

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #380       +/-   ##
===========================================
+ Coverage   16.59%   57.06%   +40.47%     
===========================================
  Files          24       24               
  Lines        2061     2073       +12     
===========================================
+ Hits          342     1183      +841     
+ Misses       1693      807      -886     
- Partials       26       83       +57     

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
pkg/vgmanager/vgmanager_controller.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
pkg/cluster/leaderelection.go	57.57% <57.57%> (ø)
pkg/vgmanager/devices.go	73.77% <81.25%> (-0.43%)	⬇️
controllers/lvmcluster_controller.go	60.00% <100.00%> (+60.00%)	⬆️
controllers/topolvm_controller.go	94.14% <100.00%> (+94.14%)	⬆️

... and 9 files with indirect coverage changes

[openshift-ci-robot]

@jakobmoellerdev: This pull request references OCPVE-622 which is a valid jira issue.

In response to this:

This removes deviceMinAge as it is not a reliable way to filter devices created by other entities.

Case to cover:
Device is freshly attached by another entity and should not be picked up by LVM Operator

Reason it doesn't work:

1. Device is attached at t0
2. Device is looked up LVM Operator at t1
3. External entity does not lookup Device in t0+30s
4. Device is viewed as available by LVM operator at t1+30s and gets used anyhow

On top of this, if a device gets created and used by LVM, LVM puts a system lock in place so there cannot ever be concurrent calls to LVM. This makes this condition uninteresting and we can remove minDeviceAge

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.

[openshift-ci]

@jakobmoellerdev: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

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.

[suleymanakbas91]

/lgtm
/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: jakobmoellerdev, suleymanakbas91

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [suleymanakbas91]

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