Add a parser to parse the phy name for fixing issue #1048(Bugfix)

[rickwu666666]

Description

Adding a parser to parse out the phy name as follows.

root@ubuntu:/home/ubuntu# iw phy
Wiphy phy0
	wiphy index: 0
	max # scan SSIDs: 20
	max scan IEs length: 365 bytes

root@ubuntu:/home/ubuntu# iw phy
Wiphy mwiphy1
	wiphy index: 1
	max # scan SSIDs: 10
	max scan IEs length: 256 bytes

Resolved issues

This change is trying to fix the issue.

Documentation

Tests

Side load result on the machine that phy name is mwiphy:
https://pastebin.canonical.com/p/3bC2YR4Zj3/

Side load result on the machine that phy name is phy:
https://pastebin.canonical.com/p/7qKNP77gBH/

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 41.64%. Comparing base (884c449) to head (fe02104).
Report is 311 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main    #1099   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   41.64%   41.64%           
=======================================
  Files         340      340           
  Lines       37742    37742           
  Branches     6417     6417           
=======================================
  Hits        15716    15716           
  Misses      21378    21378           
  Partials      648      648           

Flag	Coverage Δ
provider-resource	22.85% <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.

[pieqq]

As usual, thanks @rickwu666666 for providing a clear explanation and test submissions for the different cases.

I think these Shell commands are quite horrible to be honest. They were not readable before your patch (thank you, regular expressions!), and they got even worse with your patch because the line is even longer 😃

On top of that, none of this is tested.

Let's rewrite this using Python. This will allow us to add unit tests and have a more solid case for the future.

If you want, we can set some time aside and do some pair programming to tackle this. Just ping me :)

[rickwu666666]

@pieqq Thanks, and I think we can leverage Issac's PR#1175 in the future. So I guess we can close this for now.

[rickwu666666]

Close this PR since the branch is pull from my personal repo. Create another PR for this topic.