feat: support viploadbalancer controller

[wangxye]

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

As the second-level controller for the multi-region load balancer, It is used to support the control of high availability of virtual IP based edge services, monitor poolservice changes, and is used to synchronize vrid changes to the vip agent at the edge.

Special notes for your reviewer:

/assign @rambohe-ch @zyjhtangtang @River-sh @Rui-Gan

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Support left-closed-right-open ip assignment：

# if you use vip for load-balancer, you should annotate the vip address for the nodepool.
kubectl annotate nodepool hangzhou openyurt.io/address-pools="192.168.0.1-192.168.1.0, 10.0.1.0"

# For vip-type load balance, if you want to specify a vip for a service, you needs to annotate the specified address.
kubectl annotate service nginx service.openyurt.io/vip="192.168.0.1-168.0.3, 10.0.1.0"

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 69.06977% with 133 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 56.57%. Comparing base (3713163) to head (71bf9ce).
Report is 81 commits behind head on master.

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
...rset/viploadbalancer/viploadbalancer_controller.go	57.63%	76 Missing and 35 partials ⚠️
...oller/loadbalancerset/viploadbalancer/predicate.go	70.58%	5 Missing and 5 partials ⚠️
...roller/loadbalancerset/viploadbalancer/ip_utils.go	93.44%	4 Missing and 4 partials ⚠️
...anager/webhook/service/v1alpha1/service_default.go	80.00%	1 Missing and 1 partial ⚠️
...anager/webhook/service/v1alpha1/service_handler.go	0.00%	2 Missing ⚠️

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #2036      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   56.09%   56.57%   +0.47%     
==========================================
  Files         186      193       +7     
  Lines       18092    18771     +679     
==========================================
+ Hits        10149    10619     +470     
- Misses       6910     7052     +142     
- Partials     1033     1100      +67     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	56.57% <69.06%> (+0.47%)	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

[wangxye]

/hold

[wangxye]

/rerun

[wangxye]

/unhold

[wangxye]

/assign @rambohe-ch @zyjhtangtang @River-sh @Rui-Gan

[wangxye]

I have updated the logic of syncPoolService to first synchronize the validly allocated vrids in the cluster first, which is used to support the user-specified mode of vrid deployment. In addition, we will perform unified allocation for unallocated or vrid exceptions, which include cases where the annotation of the vrid is null, the vrid is abnormal, and the vrid is out of range. This layer of logic will also be judged in reconcileDelete.

[wangxye]

create flow:

delete flow:

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
1 New issue
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarCloud

[wangxye]

@rambohe-ch Do you have time to look at this?

[rambohe-ch]

@rambohe-ch Do you have time to look at this?

@wangxye Sorry to response very lately, because of dealing with some personal works.
I will review this pull request in this week, please stay tuned.

[wangxye]

@rambohe-ch Do you have time to look at this?

@wangxye Sorry to response very lately, because of dealing with some personal works. I will review this pull request in this week, please stay tuned.

Okay, no problem, looking forward to your feedback so we can get it done early!

[stale]

This issue has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had recent activity. It will be closed if no further activity occurs. Thank you for your contributions.