backup: skip the powered-off precondition for the NAS provider

[weizhouapache]

Description

Only KBOSS needs the powered-off check before restoreVolumeFromBackupAndAttachToVM.

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

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]

This condition check was added in the KBOSS PR (#12758).

I’m not sure why it was added to the providers (excluding KBOSS). I assume this is a typo and that it should apply to KBOSS only.

Please correct me if I’m wrong. @JoaoJandre @winterhazel

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 0% with 1 line in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 19.78%. Comparing base (d87c804) to head (a23ef59).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...rg/apache/cloudstack/backup/BackupManagerImpl.java	0.00%	1 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@             Coverage Diff              @@
##               main   #14094      +/-   ##
============================================
- Coverage     19.78%   19.78%   -0.01%     
+ Complexity    19995    19989       -6     
============================================
  Files          6371     6371              
  Lines        575909   575909              
  Branches      70509    70509              
============================================
- Hits         113950   113928      -22     
- Misses       449526   449550      +24     
+ Partials      12433    12431       -2     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	3.52% <ø> (ø)
unittests	21.05% <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 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.

[Copilot]

Warning

Copilot couldn't run its full agentic review because it didn't start before the timeout. Make sure your repository has a runner available, or add a copilot-code-review.yml file specifying one with the runs-on attribute. See the docs for more details.

Pull request overview

Updates the restore-volume workflow so the “VM must be powered off” precondition is enforced only for the KBOSS backup provider, allowing other providers (e.g., NAS) to restore/attach without requiring the VM to be powered off.

Changes:

• Inverts the provider guard so the power-off check applies only when the backup offering provider is KBOSS.

---

💡 Add a code-review agent skill or configure MCP servers for context-aware, tailored reviews. Learn more in the docs.

[weizhouapache]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@weizhouapache a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with no SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 19167

[weizhouapache]

@blueorangutan test

[blueorangutan]

@weizhouapache a [SL] Trillian-Jenkins test job (ol8 mgmt + kvm-ol8) has been kicked to run smoke tests

[JoaoJandre]

This condition check was added in the KBOSS PR (#12758).

I’m not sure why it was added to the providers (excluding KBOSS). I assume this is a typo and that it should apply to KBOSS only.

Please correct me if I’m wrong. @JoaoJandre @winterhazel

This was my error when cherry-picking the changes to main. The original branch I was working on had #7221 applied, which introduced this check for all providers. I thought it was there for a reason for other providers, so I just added an exception for KBOSS.

You can just remove the condition as a whole. It does not make sense for KBOSS. I don't think the condition makes sense for any provider actually.