[ON HOLD]feature annotation for snapshotclass provisioner

[big-appled]

Signed-off-by: Ning Ding [email protected]

Feature

Add a new annotation in snapshotclass to let user input the provisioner name, as some CSI providers have different provisioner name and driver name.

Example

In one cloud provider, the csi snapclass driver name is disk.csi.everest.io, but the storageclass provisioner name is everest-csi-provisioner.

user@machine:~$ kubectl get volumesnapshotclass csi-disk-snapclass -o yaml |grep driver
driver: disk.csi.everest.io

user@machine:~$ kubectl get sc csi-disk
NAME       PROVISIONER               RECLAIMPOLICY   VOLUMEBINDINGMODE   ALLOWVOLUMEEXPANSION   AGE
csi-disk   everest-csi-provisioner   Delete          Immediate           true                   2d6h

So with this PR feature, user can add annotation in snapclass to let velero find the correct snapclass.

velero.io/csi-volumesnapshot-class-provisioner=everest-csi-provisioner

[reasonerjt]

In one cloud provider, the csi snapclass driver name is disk.csi.everest.io, but the storageclass provisioner name is everest-csi-provisioner.

Does it follow the CSI spec? If it's not following the spec, I don't think we should patch velero to support it.

[big-appled]

In one cloud provider, the csi snapclass driver name is disk.csi.everest.io, but the storageclass provisioner name is everest-csi-provisioner.

Does it follow the CSI spec? If it's not following the spec, I don't think we should patch velero to support it.

K8s CSI spec does NOT require the two names (provisioner and driver) be the same. So I believe it is a valid case.

[jerry-jibu]

In one cloud provider, the csi snapclass driver name is disk.csi.everest.io, but the storageclass provisioner name is everest-csi-provisioner.

Does it follow the CSI spec? If it's not following the spec, I don't think we should patch velero to support it.

CSI Spec doesn't define this part that snapshot driver name must be same to corresponding storage class provisioner name for same storage. I think it's a kind of common convention that most vendors follow it with above corner case from huawei cloud.

[reasonerjt]

@jerry-jibu sorry for the late response, as we synced offline with jibu folks, this is a corner case due to impl of Huawei's CSI driver, I suggest we hold this PR until there are more of such use cases.

[reasonerjt]

Blocking the merge of this PR, until we reach consensus