BUG 2303181: util: exclude empty label values for crushlocation map

[iPraveenParihar]

Describe what this PR does

This commit resolves a bug where node labels with empty values
are processed for the crush_location mount option,
leading to invalid mount options and subsequent mount failures.

---

Show available bot commands

These commands are normally not required, but in case of issues, leave any of
the following bot commands in an otherwise empty comment in this PR:

• /retest ci/centos/<job-name>: retest the <job-name> after unrelated
  failure (please report the failure too!)

[openshift-ci]

@iPraveenParihar: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2297265, which is invalid:

• expected the bug to target the "ODF 4.15.6" release, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

BUG 2297265: util: exclude empty label values for crushlocation map

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-sigs/prow repository.

[openshift-ci]

@iPraveenParihar: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2303181, which is invalid:

• expected the bug to target the "ODF 4.15.6" release, but it targets "---" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

BUG 2303181: util: exclude empty label values for crushlocation map

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-sigs/prow repository.

[iPraveenParihar]

/bugzilla refresh

[openshift-ci]

@iPraveenParihar: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2303181, which is invalid:

• expected the bug to target the "ODF 4.15.6" release, but it targets "ODF 4.15.7" instead

Comment /bugzilla refresh to re-evaluate validity if changes to the Bugzilla bug are made, or edit the title of this pull request to link to a different bug.

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

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-sigs/prow repository.

[iPraveenParihar]

/bugzilla refresh

[openshift-ci]

@iPraveenParihar: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2303181, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

• bug is open, matching expected state (open)
• bug target release (ODF 4.15.7) matches configured target release for branch (ODF 4.15.7)
• bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @keesturam

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

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-sigs/prow repository.

[openshift-ci]

@openshift-ci[bot]: GitHub didn't allow me to request PR reviews from the following users: keesturam.

Note that only red-hat-storage members and repo collaborators can review this PR, and authors cannot review their own PRs.

In response to this:

@iPraveenParihar: This pull request references Bugzilla bug 2303181, which is valid. The bug has been moved to the POST state.

3 validation(s) were run on this bug

• bug is open, matching expected state (open)
• bug target release (ODF 4.15.7) matches configured target release for branch (ODF 4.15.7)
• bug is in the state ASSIGNED, which is one of the valid states (NEW, ASSIGNED, ON_DEV, POST, POST)

Requesting review from QA contact:
/cc @keesturam

In response to this:

/bugzilla refresh

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-sigs/prow repository.

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-sigs/prow repository.

[iPraveenParihar]

/cc @Madhu-1 @Rakshith-R

[iPraveenParihar]

@Madhu-1, do we want codespell to be fixed in this PR or a Separate?

[Madhu-1]

@Madhu-1, do we want codespell to be fixed in this PR or a Separate?

@iPraveenParihar lets fix it in this PR itself, please add a commit for it as well.

[Madhu-1]

/lgtm
/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: iPraveenParihar, Madhu-1

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 [Madhu-1]

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

[openshift-ci]

@iPraveenParihar: All pull requests linked via external trackers have merged:

• red-hat-storage/ceph-csi#355

Bugzilla bug 2303181 has been moved to the MODIFIED state.

In response to this:

BUG 2303181: util: exclude empty label values for crushlocation map

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-sigs/prow repository.