[cinder-csi-plugin] add support for openstack api metrics

[zetaab]

What this PR does / why we need it:

see comment https://github.com/kubernetes/cloud-provider-openstack/pull/1398#issuecomment-1141721027 https://github.com/kubernetes/cloud-provider-openstack/pull/1398#issuecomment-1141752625

Which issue this PR fixes(if applicable): fixes #913

Special notes for reviewers:

Release note:

[cinder-csi-plugin] expose csi & openstack metrics by providing new flag `--http-endpoint`

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: To complete the pull request process, please ask for approval from zetaab after the PR has been reviewed.

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

[zetaab]

/hold

still in progress

[zetaab]

notes:

• it does not have any authentication. If people does not want expose these metrics to whole cluster, they can use either rbac-proxy or networkpolicies to deny that.
• should cinder-csi component fetch other csi sidecar metrics internally and provide them? I did not find any example of doing that. Asked in sig-storage slack channel and at least some people are fetching sidecar metrics from their own containers.

/hold cancel

[zetaab]

/hold cancel

@chrigl @jichenjc could you check this? I do not understand why cinder-e2e-test is crashlooping, I cannot reproduce that locally using new image created from this PR.

As I see it, we need these metrics. I know - its not the best way to expose these if we compare to OCCM. However, its better than nothing.

[jichenjc]

https://github.com/kubernetes/cloud-provider-openstack/pull/1898 also failed , so it's gate issue but don't know reason so far ..

[chrigl]

first... also ignoring the fact that e2e doesn't work at the moment. Before the crash loop it was incredibly flaky.

In general absolute +1 for having metrics. But is this something we want to have in that form in for 1.24, or do we want to bring it in v1.25. If 1.25 is our target, would it make sense to think through it and come up with an idea to do it "better" (what ever better in that context means)? The answer cold also be both :)

[zetaab]

@chrigl as I see it 1.25 could be the target. Its fine for me to put this on hold and think better options. With this we can get it working and its done in similar way for instance in AWS side. sig-storage did not bring any new ideas to this "issue".

[k8s-ci-robot]

@zetaab: 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.

[k8s-ci-robot]

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

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
openstack-cloud-keystone-authentication-authorization-test	dd83566951efa9e892d60e697b49f6f04a1bdfab	link	true	/test openstack-cloud-keystone-authentication-authorization-test
openstack-cloud-controller-manager-e2e-test	dd83566951efa9e892d60e697b49f6f04a1bdfab	link	true	/test openstack-cloud-controller-manager-e2e-test
openstack-cloud-csi-cinder-e2e-test	dd83566951efa9e892d60e697b49f6f04a1bdfab	link	true	/test openstack-cloud-csi-cinder-e2e-test
openstack-cloud-csi-manila-e2e-test	dd83566951efa9e892d60e697b49f6f04a1bdfab	link	true	/test openstack-cloud-csi-manila-e2e-test
openstack-cloud-csi-cinder-sanity-test	dd83566951efa9e892d60e697b49f6f04a1bdfab	link	true	/test openstack-cloud-csi-cinder-sanity-test
openstack-cloud-csi-manila-sanity-test	dd83566951efa9e892d60e697b49f6f04a1bdfab	link	true	/test openstack-cloud-csi-manila-sanity-test

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-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 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 PR is closed

You can:

• Reopen this PR with /reopen
• Mark this 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 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 PR is closed

You can:

• Reopen this PR with /reopen
• Mark this 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.

[MPV]

I agree metrics would be really helpful (currently having issues communicating with Cinder API, being able to easily measure and quantify it would be really useful).

Any thoughts on what next steps could be here?

[zetaab]

@MPV metrics are merged in https://github.com/kubernetes/cloud-provider-openstack/pull/2077 and available in 1.27 release (by default disabled)