feat(detector): resource detector matched policy potimization

[CharlesQQ]

What type of PR is this?
/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
part of #5790

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

[karmada-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by:
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please assign rainbowmango 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:

• OWNERS

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

[codecov-commenter]

⚠️ Please install the to ensure uploads and comments are reliably processed by Codecov.

Codecov Report

Attention: Patch coverage is 12.69841% with 55 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.

Project coverage is 46.38%. Comparing base (88c3e44) to head (0345eed).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
pkg/detector/detector.go	7.69%	36 Missing ⚠️
pkg/detector/policy.go	0.00%	7 Missing ⚠️
pkg/detector/compare.go	0.00%	4 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
cmd/controller-manager/app/controllermanager.go	0.00%	4 Missing ⚠️
pkg/detector/preemption.go	71.42%	2 Missing ⚠️

❗ Your organization needs to install the Codecov GitHub app to enable full functionality.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #5802      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   46.20%   46.38%   +0.17%     
==========================================
  Files         663      663              
  Lines       54580    54560      -20     
==========================================
+ Hits        25218    25306      +88     
+ Misses      27739    27624     -115     
- Partials     1623     1630       +7     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	46.38% <12.69%> (+0.17%)	⬆️

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.

---

🚨 Try these New Features:

• Flaky Tests Detection - Detect and resolve failed and flaky tests

[chaosi-zju]

does d.Client and d.InformerManager all have cache, and different cache?

Is it possible that there is a policy in the d.InformerManager cache, but it has not been synced to the d.Client's cache?

In that case, if the creation time of deployment and policy are very close, maybe d.client could not find the policy. (the failed e2e job 32793260336 maybe caused by it)

[chaosi-zju]

the failed e2e job 32793260336 maybe caused by it

my guass maybe correct, as you see corresponding detector log

2024-11-11T08:19:26.656651192Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.656575       1 detector.go:236] Reconciling object: apps/v1, kind=Deployment, karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc
2024-11-11T08:19:26.656739492Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.656663       1 detector.go:919] PropagationPolicy(karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc) has been added or updated.
2024-11-11T08:19:26.65699674Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.656902       1 detector.go:361] Attempts to match policy for resource(apps/v1, kind=Deployment, karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc)
2024-11-11T08:19:26.657175843Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.657084       1 compare.go:66] No propagationpolicy match for resource(apps/v1, kind=Deployment, karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc)
2024-11-11T08:19:26.657185351Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.657101       1 detector.go:378] Attempts to match cluster policy for resource(apps/v1, kind=Deployment, karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc)
2024-11-11T08:19:26.65742698Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.657118       1 detector.go:386] No clusterpropagationpolicy find.
2024-11-11T08:19:26.660140465Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.660036       1 detector.go:1160] Matched 0 resources by policy(karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc)
2024-11-11T08:19:26.660781832Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.660194       1 detector.go:785] Add object(apps/v1, kind=Deployment, karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc) to waiting list, length of list is: 215
2024-11-11T08:19:26.667659376Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.666134       1 detector.go:236] Reconciling object: apps/v1, kind=Deployment, karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc
2024-11-11T08:19:26.667677359Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.666184       1 detector.go:361] Attempts to match policy for resource(apps/v1, kind=Deployment, karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc)
2024-11-11T08:19:26.667682419Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.666302       1 compare.go:66] No propagationpolicy match for resource(apps/v1, kind=Deployment, karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc)
2024-11-11T08:19:26.667686015Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.666311       1 detector.go:378] Attempts to match cluster policy for resource(apps/v1, kind=Deployment, karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc)
2024-11-11T08:19:26.667689341Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.666326       1 detector.go:386] No clusterpropagationpolicy find.
2024-11-11T08:19:26.667692678Z stderr F I1111 08:19:26.666461       1 policy.go:98] No matched policy for object: apps/v1, kind=Deployment, karmadatest-xnw86/deploy-4dpmc

[CharlesQQ]

In that case, if the creation time of deployment and policy are very close, maybe d.client could not find the policy.

Both obtain resource objects from the cache. I think If d.Client has this problem, d.InformerManager may also have it.

[chaosi-zju]

The failed reason can be explained as follows:

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

You are advised to obtain the policy list from karmada-apiserver and check the performance consumption caused by karmada-apiserver to see if the benefits are greatly improved.

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

/retest

[zach593]

Is the purpose of this PR to remove the dependency on unstructured?
Why do we need this generated typed informer manager instead of using the controller-runtime informer?

[CharlesQQ]

Why do we need this generated typed informer manager instead of using the controller-runtime informer?

If controller-runtime is used, the logic of resource detector resources entering the workqueue also needs to use controller-runtime.