koord-scheduler: support Reservation reserve devices

[eahydra]

Ⅰ. Describe what this PR does

Enhanced DeviceShare scheduling plugin:

• Support reserving device via Reservation.

There are some differences between Device Resource Reservation and other resource processing methods. Other resources, such as CPU/Memory or CPU Core, are continuous, single-dimensional resources. During Pod scheduling, resources reserved by Reservation and the remaining resources on the node can be allocated together. However, Devices such as GPUs are device instances. They are continuous within a single instance, and it is impossible to combine the Device resources reserved by Reservation with the remaining Device resources of the same type on the node. This may lead to fragmentation. However, the current device resource abstraction and resource protocol can only handle this for the time being.

For example, Reservation A reserves koordiantor.sh/gpu-core:100, and the scheduler allocates a GPU device instance for it. If an owner Pod A allocates koordinator.sh/gpu-core:80 first, and then an owner Pod B applies for koordinator.sh/gpu-core:50, Pod B cannot reuse the resources reserved by this Reservation to be allocated from the node.

Additionally, the device resources specified when Reservation reserves resources need to correspond to the Requests of the owner Pod. For example, if Reservation A reserves koordinator.sh/gpu-core:100, the Pod must also write koordinator.sh/gpu-core:100 instead of nvidia.com/gpu:1; otherwise, the Reservation cannot be reused.

I am exploring ways to optimize this issue in future upgrades, including upgrading to k8s version1.24 and introducing the informer transformer.

Ⅱ. Does this pull request fix one issue?

Ⅲ. Describe how to verify it

Ⅳ. Special notes for reviews

V. Checklist

• I have written necessary docs and comments
• I have added necessary unit tests and integration tests
• All checks passed in make test

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 68.67% and project coverage change: -0.06 ⚠️

Comparison is base (dc360a6) 66.29% compared to head (6d1422b) 66.23%.

❗ Current head 6d1422b differs from pull request most recent head a399701. Consider uploading reports for the commit a399701 to get more accurate results

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #1141      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   66.29%   66.23%   -0.06%     
==========================================
  Files         280      280              
  Lines       30317    29733     -584     
==========================================
- Hits        20099    19695     -404     
+ Misses       8783     8607     -176     
+ Partials     1435     1431       -4     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	66.23% <68.67%> (-0.06%)	⬇️

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

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
...lugins/reservation/controller/node_eventhandler.go	0.00% <0.00%> (ø)
pkg/util/reservation/reservation.go	46.28% <29.85%> (-28.04%)	⬇️
.../scheduler/plugins/reservation/pod_eventhandler.go	40.62% <40.62%> (ø)
...plugins/reservation/controller/pod_eventhandler.go	40.84% <40.84%> (ø)
pkg/scheduler/plugins/deviceshare/utils.go	90.73% <50.00%> (-0.58%)	⬇️
pkg/scheduler/plugins/reservation/eventhandler.go	60.86% <60.86%> (ø)
pkg/scheduler/plugins/reservation/nominator.go	61.90% <61.90%> (ø)
pkg/scheduler/plugins/deviceshare/plugin.go	73.07% <68.98%> (+1.64%)	⬆️
...reservation/controller/reservation_eventhandler.go	69.23% <69.23%> (ø)
...ugins/reservation/controller/garbage_collection.go	69.44% <69.44%> (ø)
... and 13 more

... and 39 files with indirect coverage changes

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[ZiMengSheng]

/lgtm
/approve

[jasonliu747]

/lgtm

[FillZpp]

/lgtm

[eahydra]

/approve

[koordinator-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: eahydra, FillZpp, jasonliu747, ZiMengSheng

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• apis/OWNERS [FillZpp]
• pkg/descheduler/OWNERS [FillZpp,eahydra]
• pkg/scheduler/OWNERS [eahydra]
• pkg/util/OWNERS [FillZpp]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment