test: Added E2E tests for secondary region and windows nodes

[quixoticmonk]

Summary

This PR extends the existing E2E workflow to consider a secondary region us-east-2 and a cluster with windows nodes.

Resolves: #94

Changes

• Updated the test workflows to take region parameter from the workflow call than the originally hard coded us-east-1.
• The region value is picked from a map including cluster versions( current, target) to invoke the e2e template.
• Cluster deletion action updated to pick the map value of region than us-east-1
• Note: A redundant aws-actions/configure-aws-credentials@v2 is added before cluster upgrade test to handle some of the additional time taken for the node groups in the windows usecase( Can possibly look to run --parallel)

User experience

No user experience changes for end user. This would support the maintainers in testing the utility across additional parameters.

Checklist

If your change doesn't seem to apply, please leave them unchecked.

• I have performed a self-review of this change
• Changes have been tested
• Changes are documented

Acknowledgment

By submitting this pull request, I confirm that you can use, modify, copy, and redistribute this contribution, under the terms of your choice.

Disclaimer: We value your time and bandwidth. As such, any pull requests created on non-triaged issues might not be successful.

[codecov-commenter]

Codecov Report

Patch and project coverage have no change.

Comparison is base (5f164f7) 27.55% compared to head (6df992d) 27.55%.

📣 This organization is not using Codecov’s GitHub App Integration. We recommend you install it so Codecov can continue to function properly for your repositories. Learn more

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main      #95   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage   27.55%   27.55%           
=======================================
  Files          14       14           
  Lines        1938     1938           
=======================================
  Hits          534      534           
  Misses       1404     1404           

Help us with your feedback. Take ten seconds to tell us how you rate us. Have a feature suggestion? Share it here.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Do you have feedback about the report comment? Let us know in this issue.

[bryantbiggs]

This is a great start but its also somewhat starting in the "ideal" scenario. We should look at purposely starting from a state that is far from ideal to ensure that the process will upgrade correctly across the known hurdles we throw its way. Here is an example "non-ideal" cluster in Terraform that I have used for executing checks on https://github.com/clowdhaus/eksup/blob/7980b93818f55b5c3d795dd1cc430832dafd09e8/examples/mixed/main.tf#L53-L155

• Control plane does not match data plane, there are various levels of skew
• Addons are intentionally out of date and even not supported on next Kubernetes version
• Mix of managed, self-managed, and Fargate profiles

[bryantbiggs]

Note: Just to be clear, I am not proposing Terraform here - its more of the fact that we start with a cluster that would have several hurdles that it would need to overcome in the upgrade process. Make sure it upgrades the managed nodegorup first if it has a skew of +1 already since thats required by EKS, make the VPC CNI upgrade several times in sequence across one minor version at a time, etc.

[quixoticmonk]

Thank you. Agreed on the required breadth on these tests. Will take a look at some of those examples and have those in our eksctl configs as well.