[FLINK-17170][kinesis] Fix deadlock during stop-with-savepoint.

[AHeise]

What is the purpose of the change

During stop-with-savepoint cancel is called under lock in legacy sources. Thus, if the fetcher is trying to emit a record at the same time, it cannot obtain the checkpoint lock. This behavior leads to a deadlock while cancel awaits the termination of the fetcher.

Brief change log

• The fix is to mostly rely on the termination inside the run method. As a safe-guard, close also awaits termination where close is always caused without lock.
• Adding ITCase that covers the behavior.

Verifying this change

• Added FlinkKinesisITCase.

Does this pull request potentially affect one of the following parts:

• Dependencies (does it add or upgrade a dependency): (yes / no)
• The public API, i.e., is any changed class annotated with @Public(Evolving): (yes / no)
• The serializers: (yes / no / don't know)
• The runtime per-record code paths (performance sensitive): (yes / no / don't know)
• Anything that affects deployment or recovery: JobManager (and its components), Checkpointing, Kubernetes/Yarn/Mesos, ZooKeeper: (yes / no / don't know)
• The S3 file system connector: (yes / no / don't know)

Documentation

• Does this pull request introduce a new feature? (yes / no)
• If yes, how is the feature documented? (not applicable / docs / JavaDocs / not documented)

[flinkbot]

Thanks a lot for your contribution to the Apache Flink project. I'm the @flinkbot. I help the community
to review your pull request. We will use this comment to track the progress of the review.

Automated Checks

Last check on commit 0dfd34c (Sat Aug 28 11:18:27 UTC 2021)

Warnings:

• 2 pom.xml files were touched: Check for build and licensing issues.
• No documentation files were touched! Remember to keep the Flink docs up to date!

_{Mention the bot in a comment to re-run the automated checks.}

Review Progress

• ❓ 1. The [description] looks good.
• ❓ 2. There is [consensus] that the contribution should go into to Flink.
• ❓ 3. Needs [attention] from.
• ❓ 4. The change fits into the overall [architecture].
• ❓ 5. Overall code [quality] is good.

Please see the Pull Request Review Guide for a full explanation of the review process.

Details

The Bot is tracking the review progress through labels. Labels are applied according to the order of the review items. For consensus, approval by a Flink committer of PMC member is required

Bot commands

The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

• @flinkbot approve description to approve one or more aspects (aspects: description, consensus, architecture and quality)
• @flinkbot approve all to approve all aspects
• @flinkbot approve-until architecture to approve everything until architecture
• @flinkbot attention @username1 [@username2 ..] to require somebody's attention
• @flinkbot disapprove architecture to remove an approval you gave earlier

[flinkbot]

CI report:

• 7bd47f9 Azure: SUCCESS Azure: FAILURE

Bot commands

The @flinkbot bot supports the following commands:

• @flinkbot run travis re-run the last Travis build
• @flinkbot run azure re-run the last Azure build

[dannycranmer]

The fix LGTM. We now have 2x Kinesis IT that duplicate setup. I would suggest we either:

• Move the test from e2e test module to this module, or
• Create a follow up Jira to capture the tidy up

[dannycranmer]

LGTM

[AHeise]

@flinkbot run azure

[AHeise]

@flinkbot run azure

[AHeise]

@flinkbot run azure

[AHeise]

Build was green when disabling FLINK-22566, so merging without disable commit.