Add manifest for fde tests (BugFix)

[LiaoU3]

Description

Add manifest for FDE tests, so that it could be skipped easily while running manual tests.

Resolved issues

N/A

Documentation

N/A

Tests

N/A

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 50.44%. Comparing base (57f3577) to head (a0d663c).
Report is 27 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1898   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   50.44%   50.44%           
=======================================
  Files         382      382           
  Lines       41027    41027           
  Branches     6890     6890           
=======================================
  Hits        20697    20697           
  Misses      19585    19585           
  Partials      745      745           

Flag	Coverage Δ
provider-base	26.68% <ø> (ø)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 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.

[Hook25]

This looks ok to me but it makes me wonder if we should somehow just use

(manifest.has_tpm == 'True' or manifest.has_tpm2 == 'True')

What's the difference here?

[LiaoU3]

This looks ok to me but it makes me wonder if we should somehow just use

(manifest.has_tpm == 'True' or manifest.has_tpm2 == 'True')

What's the difference here?

Like you said, of course TPM and secureboot are prerequisites for enabling FDE. However, a device has TPM supported does not really need to enable FDE. For instance, a laptop nowadays has TPM and secureboot supported, however, we currently do not enable FDE on them now.

[pieqq]

Is it possible to detect if FDE is enabled for a given image? If so, we could use a resource job instead to determine whether or not to test FDE-related stuff.

My concern with using a manifest is that FDE is enabled by the image install/config, not by the hardware, so in the lab it's going to be more complicated to define whether or not FDE tests should be run (if we test a stock Ubuntu version, for instance, FDE wouldn't be enabled, so if the manifest says it is using FDE, we will get wrong results).

[Hook25]

I'm pretty sure at least for CI this will be a bit of a mess either way. I'm pro using having this new manifest, but just know this will cause issues once we start enforcing manifests, given that if enabled, it breaks the image.