noderesourcefit: scheduler queueing hints

[carlory]

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Part of #118893

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

kube-scheduler implements scheduling hints for the NodeResourceFit plugin.
The scheduling hints allow the scheduler to only retry scheduling a Pod
that was previously rejected by the NodeResourceFit plugin if a new Node or 
a Node update matches the Pod's resource requirements or if an old pod update 
or delete matches the  Pod's resource requirements.

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

[k8s-ci-robot]

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.

[carlory]

/assign @sanposhiho

[carlory]

/test pull-kubernetes-unit

[carlory]

/test pull-kubernetes-node-e2e-containerd

[carlory]

/test pull-kubernetes-integration

[carlory]

/test pull-kubernetes-node-e2e-containerd

[sanposhiho]

/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 4fd410054837940f4f8d272fc4e2abd3f994f21a

[kerthcet]

So, speaking of this removal, it's not because it'd be a performance enhancement, but it's just because it's problematic.

Sorry for the delayed reply, fair, we should not rely on the wrong assumption.

[alculquicondor]

/release-note-edit

kube-scheduler implements scheduling hints for the NodeResourceFit plugin.
The scheduling hints allow the scheduler to only retry scheduling a Pod
that was previously rejected by the NodeResourceFit plugin if a new Node or 
a Node update matches the Pod's resource requirements or if an old pod update 
or delete matches the  Pod's resource requirements.

[alculquicondor]

why are you putting this logic inside a function that is used once?

[carlory]

the func was also used to check the origin node in previous comments. we have to drop the logic because of the preCheck on node. please see #119177 (comment) for more context.

[alculquicondor]

unfold the function down below or have it as a separate function, instead of an anonymous function.

[carlory]

updated.

[alculquicondor]

/hold

@sanposhiho do any of the problems found for the other scheduler plugins affect this as well?

[sanposhiho]

@alculquicondor

noderesourcefit is impacted by the bug, but we properly handle the scenario: #119177 (comment)
So, basically, I don't see any problem in this implementation. (I should've noticed about other plugins when I commented ^ by the way 😓)

Although it's better to have an integration test to make sure this QHint working appropriately, as part of #122305, IMO it can be followed up.

[alculquicondor]

/hold cancel

[sanposhiho]

/lgtm

Leave approval for @alculquicondor

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: a970ffee4b848cd02d6170b5f2f1068dca3321bf

[alculquicondor]

/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: alculquicondor, carlory

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:

• pkg/scheduler/OWNERS [alculquicondor]

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