Ignore more FS types in Disks usage for Admin System Info

@mva - please add typebug typefeature, typemaintenance or a subtype label to this merge request.

typebug: Defects in shipped code and fixes for those defects. This includes all the bug types (availability, performance, security vulnerability, mobile, etc.)
typefeature: Effort to deliver new features, feature changes & improvements. This includes all changes as part of new product requirements like application limits.
typemaintenance: Up-keeping efforts & catch-up corrective improvements that are not Features nor Bugs. This includes restructuring for long-term maintainability, stability, reducing technical debt, improving the contributor experience, or upgrading dependencies.

See the handbook for more guidance on classifying.

This message was created with automation and Engineering Productivity is looking for feedback in this issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/quality/engineering-productivity/team/-/issues/43

added 1st contribution Community contribution labels

mentioned in issue gitlab-org/quality/triage-reports#8149 (closed)

Thanks so much for this contribution @mva!

@splattael would you be up for reviewing this Community contribution that adds some file system mount types to an array? Also, it looks like this is one of our "unowned" sections, so I'm not sure which team to direct this to

added featureenhancement typefeature labels

requested review from @splattael

assigned to @mva

mentioned in issue gitlab-org/quality/engineering-productivity/team#43 (closed)

mentioned in issue gitlab-org/quality/triage-reports#8151 (closed)

changed the description

changed milestone to %15.2

added admin dashboard + 1 deleted label

approved this merge request

@splattael, thanks for approving this merge request.

This is the first time the merge request is approved. To ensure full test coverage, please start a new pipeline before merging.

For more info, please refer to the following links:

mentioned in issue #27953 (closed)

resolved all threads

Suggested Reviewers (beta)

The individuals below may be good candidates to participate in the review based on various factors.

You can use slash commands in comments to quickly assign /assign_reviewer @user1.

Suggested Reviewers
`@stanhu`, `@reprazent`, `@tkuah`, `@jagood`, `@shinya.maeda`

If you do not believe these suggestions are useful, please apply the label Bad Suggested Reviewer. You can also provide feedback for this feature on this issue: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/issues/357923.

Automatically generated by Suggested Reviewers Bot - an experimental ML-based recommendation engine created by ~"group::applied ml".

2 Warnings

featureaddition and featureenhancement merge requests normally have a documentation change. Consider adding a documentation update or confirming the documentation plan with the Technical Writer counterpart.

For more information, see:

The Handbook page on merge request types.
The definition of done documentation.

You've made some app changes, but didn't add any tests.
That's OK as long as you're refactoring existing code,
but please consider adding any of the , , , labels.

1 Message

CHANGELOG missing:

If you want to create a changelog entry for GitLab FOSS, add the Changelog trailer to the commit message you want to add to the changelog.

If you want to create a changelog entry for GitLab EE, also add the EE: true trailer to your commit message.

If this merge request doesn't need a CHANGELOG entry, feel free to ignore this message.

If needed, you can retry the danger-review job that generated this comment.

Reviewer roulette

Changes that require review have been detected!

Please refer to the table below for assigning reviewers and maintainers suggested by Danger in the specified category:

Category	Reviewer	Maintainer
backend	George Koltsov (`@georgekoltsov`) (UTC+1)	Sincheol (David) Kim (`@dskim_gitlab`) (UTC+9.5)

To spread load more evenly across eligible reviewers, Danger has picked a candidate for each review slot, based on their timezone. Feel free to override these selections if you think someone else would be better-suited or use the GitLab Review Workload Dashboard to find other available reviewers.

To read more on how to use the reviewer roulette, please take a look at the Engineering workflow and code review guidelines. Please consider assigning a reviewer or maintainer who is a domain expert in the area of the merge request.

Once you've decided who will review this merge request, assign them as a reviewer! Danger does not automatically notify them for you.

Generated by Danger

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for a43ae4df succeeds

canceled the automatic merge

changed title from more fs to ignore in Disks usage in server_info to Ignore more FS types in Disks usage for Admin System Info

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for a43ae4df succeeds

added pipeline:skip-undercoverage label

resolved all threads

Mh https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/jobs/2654998144

I've rebased against latest master and pushed

added 295 commits

bc967c44...dc99d4b1 - 294 commits from branch gitlab-org:master
47f7ffe7 - Ignore more FS types in Disks usage for Admin System Info

Compare with previous version

added workflowin review label

added 11 commits

47f7ffe7...52036352 - 10 commits from branch gitlab-org:master
e96785fb - Ignore more FS types in Disks usage for Admin System Info

Compare with previous version

added 13 commits

e96785fb...020baa9b - 12 commits from branch gitlab-org:master
b4406628 - Ignore more FS types in Disks usage for Admin System Info

Compare with previous version

resolved all threads

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for 13bdaf88 succeeds

added 38 commits

b4406628...debbfcdb - 37 commits from branch gitlab-org:master
1135e994 - Ignore more FS types in Disks usage for Admin System Info

Compare with previous version

enabled an automatic merge when the pipeline for ab4209a5 succeeds

Allure report

allure-report-publisher generated test report!

review-qa-blocking: test report for 1135e994

expand test summary

+---------------------------------------------------------------------------+
|                              suites summary                               |
+----------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
|                      | passed | failed | skipped | flaky | total | result |
+----------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Version sanity check | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 1     | ➖     |
| Plan                 | 48     | 0      | 1       | 48    | 49    | ❗     |
| Create               | 23     | 0      | 2       | 23    | 25    | ❗     |
| Manage               | 37     | 0      | 2       | 39    | 39    | ❗     |
| Verify               | 12     | 0      | 1       | 12    | 13    | ❗     |
| Secure               | 2      | 0      | 0       | 2     | 2     | ❗     |
| Protect              | 2      | 0      | 0       | 2     | 2     | ❗     |
| Configure            | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 1     | ➖     |
| Package              | 0      | 0      | 1       | 0     | 1     | ➖     |
+----------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+
| Total                | 124    | 0      | 9       | 126   | 133   | ❗     |
+----------------------+--------+--------+---------+-------+-------+--------+

merged

@mva, how was your code review experience with this merge request? Please tell us how we can continue to iterate and improve:

Leave a or a on this comment to describe your experience.
Create a new comment starting with @gitlab-bot feedback below, and leave any additional feedback you have for us in the comment.

Have five minutes? Take our survey to give us even more feedback on how GitLab can improve the contributor experience.

Thanks for your help!