Add service port mutation test

[iXinqi]

What type of PR is this?

What this PR does / why we need it:

Adding service port mutation test. More specifically:

• Create a service
• Confirm that the service works
• Edit the service by adding a new port to it
• Confirm both ports work
• Delete the added port
• Confirm these still work

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #110918

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]

@iXinqi: 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.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @iXinqi. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes member to verify that this patch is reasonable to test. If it is, they should reply with /ok-to-test on its own line. Until that is done, I will not automatically test new commits in this PR, but the usual testing commands by org members will still work. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

Once the patch is verified, the new status will be reflected by the ok-to-test label.

I understand the commands that are listed here.

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.

[iXinqi]

Hi @jayunit100, may I have your review of this pr? I haven't tested it yet. Just want to make sure the test case meets our need. If it looks good to you, I'll go ahead and test it. Thanks.

[jayunit100]

hi xinqi - just compiled and tested it , appears to be working mostly (tested the negative case where my cluster was broke, and the test failed :))

lets make sure it passes other e2es...

/ok-to-test

then we can get a broader review on it. can you add a little more of a comment about where we saw this (i.e. we saw the original regression in alternate kube proxies, but its still a good upstream regression test to have in place)

[jayunit100]

/sig network

[jayunit100]

Xinqi can you check into those failures ?

[iXinqi]

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-kind
/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-ubuntu-containerd

[iXinqi]

/test pull-kubernetes-e2e-gce-ubuntu-containerd

[aojea]

lgtm. some nits to clean the code and stop carrying with the defer for cleanups on tests

[iXinqi]

lgtm. some nits to clean the code and stop carrying with the defer for cleanups on tests

Thanks for reviewing. I've already removed the defer functions.

[iXinqi]

Hi @aojea and @jayunit100, may I have your approval to merge this pr? Thanks!

[aojea]

great work,
Thanks

/lgtm
/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: aojea, iXinqi

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:

• test/e2e/network/OWNERS [aojea]

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

[aojea]

/kind cleanup