fix MaxNodeProvisionTime and ZeroOrMaxNodeScaling node-groups handlin…

[kruftik]

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

current code has a bug: externalgrpc service proto specification has GetOptions(...) optional method but the response type does not have MaxNodeProvisionTime ZeroOrMaxNodeScaling fields. GetOption(..) wrapper does not respect such a situration it results in 0 (zero) MaxNodeProvisionTime duration and false value for ZeroOrMaxNodeScaling options since they are default type values in case if the specific externalgrpc service implements the GetOptions() method.

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

No

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

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: kruftik / name: Dmitrii Gadeev (e678493, 2d28b69, b0efd1a, 4eee66a, 31d0e0b)

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @kruftik!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/autoscaler 🎉. 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/autoscaler 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]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kruftik
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign x13n for approval. For more information see the Kubernetes Code Review Process.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• cluster-autoscaler/OWNERS

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

[Shubham82]

/area provider/externalgrpc

[k8s-ci-robot]

@Shubham82: The label(s) area/provider/externalgrpc cannot be applied, because the repository doesn't have them.

In response to this:

/area provider/externalgrpc

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.

[kruftik]

@BigDarkClown , @feiskyer ,
could you take a look at the PR please ?

[towca]

Cloud provider PRs should be reviewed by the relevant OWNERS - in this case it looks like @dbonfigli. I took a look and the overall approach looks good, but I can't verify the proto/grpc parts.

/assign @dbonfigli
/label area/provider/externalgrpc

[k8s-ci-robot]

@towca: GitHub didn't allow me to assign the following users: dbonfigli.

Note that only kubernetes members with read permissions, repo collaborators and people who have commented on this issue/PR can be assigned. Additionally, issues/PRs can only have 10 assignees at the same time.
For more information please see the contributor guide

In response to this:

Cloud provider PRs should be reviewed by the relevant OWNERS - in this case it looks like @dbonfigli. I took a look and the overall approach looks good, but I can't verify the proto/grpc parts.

/assign @dbonfigli
/label area/provider/externalgrpc

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.

[k8s-ci-robot]

@towca: The label(s) /label area/provider/externalgrpc cannot be applied. These labels are supported: api-review, tide/merge-method-merge, tide/merge-method-rebase, tide/merge-method-squash, team/katacoda, refactor. Is this label configured under labels -> additional_labels or labels -> restricted_labels in plugin.yaml?

In response to this:

Cloud provider PRs should be reviewed by the relevant OWNERS - in this case it looks like @dbonfigli. I took a look and the overall approach looks good, but I can't verify the proto/grpc parts.

/assign @dbonfigli
/label area/provider/externalgrpc

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.

[dbonfigli]

I am not an official kubernetes member so i cannot give a review that can be used to approve this PR even if i am listed in the ownes file for this cloud provider , anyway, it looks good but the same changes and a bit more are covered on PRs #5936 and #5937 that have been created before this, @towca can we give priority to those PRs, especially #5936 that in turn is needed for the final version of #5937 that otherwise would conflict on the proto files?

[k8s-ci-robot]

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.

[x13n]

Per the comment above it looks like this PR should be closed in favor of #5936 and #5937.

/close

[k8s-ci-robot]

@x13n: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

Per the comment above it looks like this PR should be closed in favor of #5936 and #5937.

/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.