nodeaffinity: scheduler queueing hints

[carlory]

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

we previously implemented NodeAffinity QHint in #119155, but we reverted that in #122285 because of #122284, this PR implements QHint again with taking the problematic scenario into consideration

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 NodeAffinity plugin.
The scheduling hints allow the scheduler to only retry scheduling a Pod
that was previously rejected by the NodeAffinity plugin if a new Node or a Node update matches the Pod's node affinity.

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

- [KEP]: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/issues/4247

[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

[AxeZhan]

Maybe it's also worth commenting this code rather than just delete it?
We can just uncomment this code after removing preCheck

[carlory]

cc @sanposhiho what do you think?

[sanposhiho]

I don't like commented code generally speaking. We're not sure we'd be able to use commented code as it is when we uncomment them. Plus, we can just revisit the previous implementation when we want -especially this case, we actually committed it into master, we can just find it in history.

[sanposhiho]

/unhold

Now the revert PR is merged.

[sanposhiho]

Thanks for a prompt action, LGTM overall. Just have a small suggestion. Also, I guess you have to rebase on the master (since it's reverted.)

[sanposhiho]

@carlory Can you put a bit more context in the PR description? (example: we previously implemented NodeAffinity QHint in PR-A, but we reverted that in PR-B because of Issue-A, this PR implements QHint again with taking the problematic scenario into consideration)

[carlory]

@sanposhiho updated.

[sanposhiho]

/lgtm

@kubernetes/sig-scheduling-approvers Anyone please take a look for /approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: d83addf48cfc2d9392a9d1085973552051a3b834

[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