GV

GeezerVison

The World Wide Web, restored to 800 pixels of glory.

Home|About|Gaming cabinet|Archives|How it works|Starter sites

On this site

  • Sign in
  • ActionsCI/CD and automation
  • CodespacesCloud development environments
  • All Features
  • Documentation
  • Training
  • Certifications
  • Build with Copilot
  • Customize Copilot
  • Integrations
  • Trending repos
  • GitHub Sponsors
  • Developer articles
  • Enterprises

This view

  • Original page
  • New address

GeezerVison is showing github.com — CSTACKEX-367: Remove LUN-map logical unit number dead code by sandeeplocharla · Pull Request #138 · NetApp/cloudstack

Conversation

@sandeeplocharla

@sandeeplocharla sandeeplocharla commented Nov 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Collaborator

Since the managed iSCSI path became // (PR #114), nothing consumes the LUN-map logical unit number. Stop fetching and returning it:

  • enableLogicalAccess/ensureLunMapped now return void; the follow-up lun-maps GET that only read the number is removed
  • getLogicalAccess returns boolean (mapping exists)
  • drop OntapStorageConstants.LOGICAL_UNIT_NUMBER and LUN-number logging in OntapPrimaryDatastoreDriver
  • update unit tests, asserting a new mapping needs one lookup and one create

Description

This PR...

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?

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
All reactions
@sandeeplocharla
sandeeplocharla requested review from piyush5netapp, rajiv-jain-netapp and suryag1201 as code owners November 11, 2026 06:32
@sandeeplocharla
CSTACKEX-367: Remove LUN-map logical unit number dead code
82b261f 
Since the managed iSCSI path became /<targetIQN>/<lunWwid> (PR #114),
nothing consumes the LUN-map logical unit number. Stop fetching and
returning it:

- enableLogicalAccess/ensureLunMapped now return void; the follow-up
  lun-maps GET that only read the number is removed
- getLogicalAccess returns boolean (mapping exists)
- drop OntapStorageConstants.LOGICAL_UNIT_NUMBER and LUN-number logging
  in OntapPrimaryDatastoreDriver
- update unit tests, asserting a new mapping needs one lookup and one
  create
@sandeeplocharla
sandeeplocharla force-pushed the bugfix/CSTACKEX-367 branch from 11be34b to 82b261f Compare November 11, 2026 06:34
@github-actions

github-actions Bot commented Nov 11, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

🔴 Test Coverage Grade: D — Marginal

Metric Value
Line coverage 25.82%
Branch coverage 20.11%

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
All reactions

Sorry, something went wrong.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
@sandeeplocharla sandeeplocharla self-assigned this Nov 11, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@rajiv-jain-netapp rajiv-jain-netapp Awaiting requested review from rajiv-jain-netapp rajiv-jain-netapp is a code owner
@piyush5netapp piyush5netapp Awaiting requested review from piyush5netapp piyush5netapp is a code owner
@suryag1201 suryag1201 Awaiting requested review from suryag1201 suryag1201 is a code owner

At least 1 approving review is required to merge this pull request.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Assignees

@sandeeplocharla sandeeplocharla

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Milestone

No milestone

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

Uh oh!

There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

1 participant

@sandeeplocharla
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
You are visitor 01402520 — GeezerVison does not store the pages you look up.
Best viewed with Netscape Navigator 4.7 or Internet Explorer 6 at 800×600. No cookies required.