Allow additional volume mounts on node pods

[AndrewSirenko]

Is this a bug fix or adding new feature?

Feature

What is this PR about? / Why do we need it?

Closes #1544

This PR adds a helm parameter that allows additional volume mounts on the node pods (and adds documentation on how to add additional volume mounts on the controller).

This would allow users to add their own mounts to the driver via the Helm parameters node.volumes and node.volumeMounts in this PR's values.yaml without needing to patch the driver.

What testing is done?

Tested on live k8s cluster.

1. Installed the ebs-csi-driver to a test cluster with two additional volume mounts for node pods.

2. Describing one of the node pods "kubectl describe pod ebs-csi-node-hstbp -n kube-system" the additional two volume mounts that were requested.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @AndrewSirenko. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-sigs 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.

[AndrewSirenko]

@ConnorJC3 Considering changing references of "node pods" to "driver's node pods" to avoid confusion. Or is this redundant?

here

[ConnorJC3]

/ok-to-test

[torredil]

/ok-to-test

[ConnorJC3]

/lgtm

Given that this is the config for the EBS CSI Driver chart, "driver's node pods" and "node pods" mean the same thing - there are no other node pods that users could be confused about.

Either wording is good in my opinion, as a matter of fact "node pods" is probably slightly better as it doesn't include obvious/redundant information.

[torredil]

Requested small changes, otherwise largely lgtm

[AndrewSirenko]

Requested small changes, otherwise largely lgtm

Fixed in latest change @torredil

[torredil]

Thanks for the quick turnaround, will let hanyuel take a look at this before approving /lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

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

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-aws-ebs-csi-driver-test-e2e-external-eks-windows	d1ebbc8	link	false	/test pull-aws-ebs-csi-driver-test-e2e-external-eks-windows

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.

[hanyuel]

/lgtm

[torredil]

/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: torredil

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:

• OWNERS [torredil]

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