Follow-up from "Add `ceph-csi-cephfs` unit to reuse existing Ceph cluster for Bare metal deployment"

The following discussion from !1088 (merged) should be addressed:

• @baburciu started a discussion:

  I think that in a follow-up MR we should make this new Storage Class the default one for capo-misc-units CI job, so that the CIs can also cover functional testing, and not just unit chart install. We could provide SC with RWX (with the Ceph config showed in docs applied in our OpenStack CI env), and have units like gitea consume this SC.
  The code block

  # maps storage class names to the name of the unit that implements it
    # (a storage class does not need to appear in this map if the required unit has the same name)
    storage_class_unit_map:
      local-path: local-path-provisioner
      longhorn: longhorn
      vsphere-csi: vsphere-csi-driver
      '{{ .Values.openstack.storageClass.name }}': cinder-csi
  
    default_storage_class_unit: >-
      {{- $default_storage_class := tuple . .Values._internal.default_storage_class | include "interpret-as-string" -}}
      {{- index (tuple . .Values._internal.storage_class_unit_map | include "interpret-inner-gotpl" | fromJson) "result" | dig $default_storage_class (printf "storage class unit not found for %s" $default_storage_class) -}}
  
    storage_class_RWX_support:
      - longhorn
    default_storage_class_RWX_support: >-
      {{- $default_storage_class := tuple . .Values._internal.default_storage_class | include "interpret-as-string" -}}
      {{- has $default_storage_class .Values._internal.storage_class_RWX_support -}}

  could be enhanced for the introduction of this new SC, such that storage_class_RWX_support is true for that particalar CI Job.
  If you guys agree, we could just turn this thread into an issue.