Add deletionTimestamp check to avoid race condition

[wpross]

This PR is to fix Issue 981.

It makes sure to check the deletionTimestamp to not sync in case the service is to be deleted in nodeSyncService.
In needsCleanup it checks the deletionTimestamp before checking for the finalizer to make sure the right path (not the else) is taken.

[linux-foundation-easycla]

The committers listed above are authorized under a signed CLA.

• ✅ login: wpross / name: Wolfgang Pross (514d6dd, a658d59)

[k8s-ci-robot]

This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If the repository mantainers determine this is a relevant issue, they will accept it by applying the triage/accepted label and provide further guidance.

The triage/accepted label can be added by org members by writing /triage accepted in a comment.

Details

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-sigs/prow repository.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Welcome @wpross!

It looks like this is your first PR to kubernetes/cloud-provider-gcp 🎉. 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/cloud-provider-gcp 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]

Hi @wpross. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes 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.

Details

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-sigs/prow repository.

[bowei]

Please add a unit test for this fix.

[wpross]

Please add a unit test for this fix.

done.

[hdp617]

/ok-to-test

[hdp617]

@wpross Thanks for looking into this! We removed Bazel recently so this PR might needs to be updated.

/assign @YifeiZhuang

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: wpross
Once this PR has been reviewed and has the lgtm label, please ask for approval from yifeizhuang. For more information see the Code Review Process.

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

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• pkg/controller/service/OWNERS

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

[YifeiZhuang]

/assign @mmamczur @FelipeYepez

[YifeiZhuang]

This is forked from here https://github.com/kubernetes/cloud-provider/blob/master/controllers/service/controller.go#L364
And it was on purpose. The service deletion is delayed and waits for all finalizers to be removed before actually deleting the object.

What are the side effect, e.g. resource leakage did you see other than the error messages.

[mmamczur]

Thanks for pointing it out @YifeiZhuang

so yes, this code was forked and is used only if the service has a specific LB class set. For usual services (no loadBalancerClass) which I believe the fix is intended for, you need to change the code in https://github.com/kubernetes/cloud-provider/ and vendor it in here