Move CSI secret handling logic to library

[mkimuram]

What type of PR is this?
/kind cleanup

What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR moves parameters/secret related functions from "kubernetes-csi/external-provisioner" and 'kubernetes-csi/external-snapshotter" to "csi-lib-utils". It is needed because these functions are expected to be used by other controllers.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Fixes #94

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

A new "params" package is added and below functions are provided:

- VerifyAndGetSecretNameAndNamespaceTemplate()
- GetSnapshotSecretReference()
- RemovePrefixedSnapshotParameters()
- GetVolumeSecretReference()
- RemovePrefixedParameters()

This package also provides "SecretParamsMap" struct that has GetSecretNameKey() and GetSecretNamespaceKey() methods. As "SecretParamsMap", below variables are provided:

For volume:
- ProvisionerSecretParams
- NodePublishSecretParams
- ControllerPublishSecretParams 
- NodeStageSecretParams
- ControllerExpandSecretParams
For snapshot:
- SnapshotterSecretParams
- SnapshotterListSecretParams

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: mkimuram
To complete the pull request process, please assign pohly after the PR has been reviewed.
You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @pohly in a comment when ready.

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS

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

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @mkimuram!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes-csi/csi-lib-utils 🎉. Please refer to our pull request process documentation to help your PR have a smooth ride to approval.

You will be prompted by a bot to use commands during the review process. Do not be afraid to follow the prompts! It is okay to experiment. Here is the bot commands documentation.

You can also check if kubernetes-csi/csi-lib-utils has its own contribution guidelines.

You may want to refer to our testing guide if you run into trouble with your tests not passing.

If you are having difficulty getting your pull request seen, please follow the recommended escalation practices. Also, for tips and tricks in the contribution process you may want to read the Kubernetes contributor cheat sheet. We want to make sure your contribution gets all the attention it needs!

Thank you, and welcome to Kubernetes. 😃

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @mkimuram. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-csi 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.

[mkimuram]

@msau42 @xing-yang

Still not tested "kubernetes-csi/external-provisioner" and 'kubernetes-csi/external-snapshotter" with this version of library. Sharing this to get early feedback on the package structure and the design of functions/parameters.

The points that need feedback are:

• Remove*Parameters functions are also moved to this package because *Params SecretParamsMap are tightly bound to this method. Is this design OK? (Without these functions, package name was expected to be "secret". Alternatively, we might expose all Const values as public scoped).
• By moving volume related functions and snapshot related functions to the same package, dependency to "github.com/kubernetes-csi/external-snapshotter/client/v4" package is introduced even if a user doesn't need to use snapshot. Is it OK or is it better to move to separate package to avoid it?
• VerifyAndGetSecretNameAndNamespaceTemplate() and SecretParamsMap.{GetSecretNameKey(), GetSecretNamespaceKey()} are exposed as public scoped, which are expected to be used in Add CSI secret templates as annotation in Provisioned PV external-provisioner#654. Is it OK or should it be in a separate PR?

[xing-yang]

I'm concerned that this lib is getting too heavy by adding dependency on snapshot client/v4 which is not needed by most sidecars.

[mkimuram]

@xing-yang

Thank you for sharing your concern.
As you mentioned, it seems that dependency is added on using the library even if the package, or 'params' package in this case, isn't used. As seen below:

mkdir -p deptest
cd deptest/
cat << EOF > deptest.go 
package main

import "github.com/kubernetes-csi/csi-lib-utils/deprecatedflags"

var _ = deprecatedflags.Add("foo")

func main() {
}
EOF

go mod init
go mod tidy
echo "replace github.com/kubernetes-csi/csi-lib-utils => ../csi-lib-utils" >> go.mod
go mod tidy

grep snapshot go.sum
github.com/kubernetes-csi/external-snapshotter/client/v4 v4.1.0/go.mod h1:YBCo4DoEeDndqvAn6eeu0vWM7QdXmHEeI9cFWplmBys=

I will consider a way to avoid passing VolumeSnapshot struct.
It just seems to need below information, not the entire struct. (Just passing snapshot.Name and snapshot.Namespace will be fine?)

namespaceParams := map[string]string{
	"volumesnapshotcontent.name": snapContentName,
	"volumesnapshot.namespace": snapshot.Namespace,
}
map[string]string{
	"volumesnapshotcontent.name": snapContentName,
	"volumesnapshot.name": snapshot.Name,
	"volumesnapshot.namespace": snapshot.Namespace,
}

[mkimuram]

Above commit removes the dependency. The same approach can be applied to Volume. As for volume, it needs to pass pvc.namespace, pvc.name, and pvc.annotation. Should it also be changed?

WDYT?

[Jiawei0227]

/ok-to-test

[k8s-ci-robot]

@mkimuram: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Rerun command
pull-kubernetes-csi-csi-lib-utils	978dd38	link	/test pull-kubernetes-csi-csi-lib-utils

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[k8s-ci-robot]

@mkimuram: PR needs rebase.

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.

[pohly]

Above commit removes the dependency. The same approach can be applied to Volume. As for volume, it needs to pass pvc.namespace, pvc.name, and pvc.annotation. Should it also be changed?

Depending on v1.PersistentVolumeClaim shouldn't be a problem, but perhaps change it for the sake of consistency?

[mkimuram]

Depending on v1.PersistentVolumeClaim shouldn't be a problem, but perhaps change it for the sake of consistency?

Yes, just for consistency. It's not a big difference, but it's a public scoped interface, which will be difficult to change later. So, I just would like to be careful in design decision.

[pohly]

I prefer pvc.namespace, pvc.name, and pvc.annotation as separate parameters, partly for consistency, partly because it clearly documents which fields are needed. The latter is less clear when passing a PVC.

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle stale
• Mark this issue or PR as rotten with /lifecycle rotten
• Close this issue or PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle stale

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Close this issue or PR with /close
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/lifecycle rotten

[k8s-triage-robot]

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Reopen this issue or PR with /reopen
• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/close

[k8s-ci-robot]

@k8s-triage-robot: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

The Kubernetes project currently lacks enough active contributors to adequately respond to all issues and PRs.

This bot triages issues and PRs according to the following rules:

• After 90d of inactivity, lifecycle/stale is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/stale was applied, lifecycle/rotten is applied
• After 30d of inactivity since lifecycle/rotten was applied, the issue is closed

You can:

• Reopen this issue or PR with /reopen
• Mark this issue or PR as fresh with /remove-lifecycle rotten
• Offer to help out with Issue Triage

Please send feedback to sig-contributor-experience at kubernetes/community.

/close

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.