Fix inter-pod anti-affinity check to consider a pod a match when all the anti-affinity terms match

[bsalamat]

What this PR does / why we need it:
Inter-pod anti-affinity check used to incorrectly consider a pod a match when any of the anti-affinity terms matched the pod. This PR fixes the logic to consider a pod a match when all the terms match the pod.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #62567

Special notes for your reviewer:

Release note:

Fix inter-pod anti-affinity check to consider a pod a match when all the anti-affinity terms match.

/sig scheduling

[bsalamat]

cc @wackxu

[dixudx]

@bsalamat IIUC I think this PR could be combined with #62591, which is aimed to the similar issue and easy to be cherry-picked.

They are both fixing pod affinity/anti-affinity issues. One is in raw affinity/anti-affinity terms and the other is in topology terms, which will match all the affinity/anti-affinity terms in topology side.

Also the description/title of this PR is misleading. This PR is focusing more on topology side.

[bsalamat]

@bsalamat IIUC I think this PR could be combined with #62591, which is aimed to the similar issue and easy to be cherry-picked.
They are both fixing pod affinity/anti-affinity issues. One is in raw affinity/anti-affinity terms and the other is in topology terms, which will match all the affinity/anti-affinity terms in topology side.

PR #62591 was targeting a different, but similar problem. That PR was intended to fix self-affinity issue, although I also fixed the anti-affinity issue in our slow path as well. This PR cannot be back-ported as it touches code that is mostly added in #62211. We could possibly back-port #62591, but even that one cannot be back-ported verbatim and needs changes.

Also the description/title of this PR is misleading. This PR is focusing more on topology side.

This PR actually fixes the issue mentioned in the title. The anti-affinity matching algorithm had a bug. The bug was not in checking topology; it was in how we combined the results of multiple anti-affinity terms.

[dixudx]

/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bsalamat, dixudx

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 [bsalamat]

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

[k8s-github-robot]

Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 62761, 62715). If you want to cherry-pick this change to another branch, please follow the instructions here.