feat(vm-storage-labeling): add storage volume labeling role

[stevefulme1]

Summary

• Adds new vm_storage_labeling role and playbook to apply labels, annotations, and descriptive names to PersistentVolumeClaims (PVCs) and DataVolumes at the OCP level
• Supports targeting volumes by name or label selectors for bulk operations (addresses the "100 VMs" use case)
• Follows existing collection patterns (vm_mac_address, vm_hot_plug) for variable naming, validation, and k8s JSON patch operations
• If a PVC is owned by a DataVolume, labels/annotations are applied to both resources

Resolves

MFG-251 — Storage Volume Labeling and Naming

Usage Example

vm_storage_labeling_request:
  - namespace: my-vms
    names:
      - vm-disk-001
      - vm-disk-002
    labels:
      app: webserver
      environment: production
    annotations:
      description: "Production web server storage"
  - namespace: dev-vms
    label_selectors:
      - app=legacy
    labels:
      migrated: "true"

Test plan

• Verify yamllint passes (confirmed locally — warnings only for line-length on playbook env lookups, matching existing patterns)
• Verify ansible-lint --offline passes production profile (confirmed locally — 0 failures, 0 warnings)
• Integration test: apply labels to PVCs by name in a test namespace
• Integration test: apply labels to PVCs by label selector
• Integration test: verify DataVolume-owned PVCs also patch the DataVolume
• Verify idempotency — re-running with same labels produces no changes

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

[sabre1041]

@stevefulme1 Would this enhancement be better served within the infra.openshift_virtualization_ops collection instead?

[stevefulme1]

yes can we move the pr there?

[sabre1041]

yes can we move the pr there?

Unfortunately, we cannot move the PR over. It would need to be recreated in the other repository

[sabre1041]

Works well. Added one comment related to whether names/labels should be required

Let's complete the discussion in this repository and then transfer it to the ops repo

[sabre1041]

Is there a need to provide either labels or PVC names? What if we wanted to apply the same labels/annotations to all PVC's in a namespace?

[stevefulme1]

Closing — this is day 2 ops functionality and has been moved to redhat-cop/openshift_virtualization_ops.

New PR: redhat-cop/openshift_virtualization_ops#5

FQCN updated from infra.openshift_virtualization_migration to infra.openshift_virtualization_ops.