Add GHA to test changes compatibility with avocado-vt

[ana]

Add a new GH Actions that can be run on-demand to test compatibility with avocado-vt

Reference discussion: avocado-framework/avocado-vt#3295

[ana]

I proposed a PR #5234 with a re-using the ansible deployment playbook.
That idea was discarded, some other ideas for the record:

• Comment from @clebergnu

@ana thanks for coming up with this. The idea of reusing the "deployment checks", AKA ansible playbooks, is great. I tried it out, and worked great.

But there's one limitation of GHA (and pretty much every other free CI offering): it lacks KVM support. And, it's very hard to go deep into Avocado-VT, and prove compatibility, without KVM. I've tried to use TCG to run say a boot test in Avocado-VT and did not have reliable results. The KVM support on Cirrus-CI, on the other hand, has been running smoothly for a good amount of time.

So, while this is certainly helpful, the platform limitation is a concern. We may be better served at this point by having a copy (or subset) of the Avocado-VT Cirrus-CI set to manual or allowing them to fail.

PS: my dream solution would be to not add anything in the Avocado repository, but allow manual triggers (like GHA allow) on the Avocado-VT repo, pointing at the branch of a given PR.

Comments?

• Reply by @ana

Hi @clebergnu

Thanks for your comment. Do you mind copying into #5233 ? Or even opening a new issue with your dream solution more detailed (dreaming is free!). And I'll think what we can do.

In the meantime, looks like github is considering to offer nested virtualization github/feedback#8305 If we have the possibility to have a self-hosted runner for tests like this one, it would be also another possible solution.

• Last comment from @clebergnu

Hi @clebergnu

Thanks for your comment. Do you mind copying into #5233 ? Or even opening a new issue with your dream solution more detailed (dreaming is free!). And I'll think what we can do.

Sure!

In the meantime, looks like github is considering to offer nested virtualization github/feedback#8305 If we have the possibility to have a self-hosted runner for tests like this one, it would be also another possible solution.

The move from GH is interesting, that would be great! Let's keep an eye on it. About the self-hosted runner, it's something to be considered indeed. Let assess the resources availability (especially the maintenance aspects).

Thanks for all the info.

[ana]

An initial approach for this could be adding a test that will run in a self-hosted runner while github adds support for virtualization.