Exclude generated files from the static check

[SataQiu]

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

Exclude generated files from the static check.
Ref: #106285 (comment)

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Ref #106405

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

[k8s-ci-robot]

@SataQiu: This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[SataQiu]

/assign @SergeyKanzhelev @thockin

[SataQiu]

/sig testing

[thockin]

This file needs to go away in #103723 but it seems compatible

@hlee95 FYI

/approve
/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: SataQiu, thockin

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:

• hack/OWNERS [SataQiu,thockin]

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

[BenTheElder]

should we perhaps exclude this particular lint about deprecated fields rather than all analysis on the files?

[SergeyKanzhelev]

should we perhaps exclude this particular lint about deprecated fields rather than all analysis on the files?

Are any static checks on generated files actionable? If it can find any potential issues, maybe we can limit skip to only SA1019 (deprecated fields).

[thockin]

We *know* there are a lot of lint-flagged things in generated files. Seems easier to just skip it all for now.

…

On Mon, Nov 15, 2021 at 12:01 PM Sergey Kanzhelev ***@***.***> wrote: should we perhaps exclude this particular lint about deprecated fields rather than all analysis on the files? Are any static checks on generated files actionable? If it can find any potential issues, maybe we can limit skip to only SA1019 (deprecated fields). — You are receiving this because you were assigned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#106418 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ABKWAVALY4ZBUX7VEQTWDGDUMFRKRANCNFSM5IBJDOOQ> . Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOS <https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675> or Android <https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign%3Dnotification-email%26utm_medium%3Demail%26utm_source%3Dgithub>.