Fix stg access group validation

[Pearl1594]

Description

The PR fixes the below issue:

VM migration fails with “Storage access groups on the source and destination hosts did not match” if list of storage access groups does not match.

Steps to reproduce:

VM with ROOT volume ed2 (Volume Type ACED) created on Host with storage access groups [legacy, aced]
VM migrated to Host with storage access groups [aced]

Expected result:
VM migrated as there is common storage access group, where ROOT volume created from (aced).

Observed result:
Storage access groups on the source and destination hosts did not match.
It just simply checks collections [legacy, aced] and [aced] should be equal.

Types of changes

• Breaking change (fix or feature that would cause existing functionality to change)
• New feature (non-breaking change which adds functionality)
• Bug fix (non-breaking change which fixes an issue)
• Enhancement (improves an existing feature and functionality)
• Cleanup (Code refactoring and cleanup, that may add test cases)
• Build/CI
• Test (unit or integration test code)

Feature/Enhancement Scale or Bug Severity

Bug Severity

• BLOCKER
• Critical
• Major
• Minor
• Trivial

Screenshots (if appropriate):

How Has This Been Tested?

How did you try to break this feature and the system with this change?

[codecov]

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 74.07407% with 7 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 17.69%. Comparing base (f4c0c31) to head (e481cb0).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
.../src/main/java/com/cloud/vm/UserVmManagerImpl.java	74.07%	5 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff            @@
##               4.22   #13562   +/-   ##
=========================================
  Coverage     17.69%   17.69%           
  Complexity    15833    15833           
=========================================
  Files          5925     5925           
  Lines        533534   533551   +17     
  Branches      65273    65274    +1     
=========================================
+ Hits          94394    94437   +43     
+ Misses       428463   428434   -29     
- Partials      10677    10680    +3     

Flag	Coverage Δ
uitests	3.69% <ø> (ø)
unittests	18.77% <74.07%> (+<0.01%)	⬆️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Harness.
📢 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.
• 📦 JS Bundle Analysis: Save yourself from yourself by tracking and limiting bundle sizes in JS merges.

[github-actions]

This pull request has merge conflicts. Dear author, please fix the conflicts and sync your branch with the base branch.

[Pearl1594]

@blueorangutan package

[blueorangutan]

@Pearl1594 a [SL] Jenkins job has been kicked to build packages. It will be bundled with KVM, XenServer and VMware SystemVM templates. I'll keep you posted as I make progress.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
103 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
60.9% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[blueorangutan]

Packaging result [SF]: ✔️ el8 ✔️ el9 ✔️ el10 ✔️ debian ✔️ suse15. SL-JID 18597