fix the attached binding deletion problem

[whitewindmills]

What type of PR is this?
/kind bug

What this PR does / why we need it:

I created a deployment that used a PVC as it's dependent resource, and the PVC was able to follow the deployment propagation correctly. When I deleted the PVC and recreated it, I found that the PVC did not follow the deployment propagation because it's ResourceBinding was not created.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
none

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

`karmada-controller-manager`: Fixed the issue that newly created attached-ResourceBinding be mystically garbage collected.

[whitewindmills]

/cc @XiShanYongYe-Chang

[codecov-commenter]

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

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Project coverage is 48.37%. Comparing base (be674c7) to head (b10c102).
Report is 6 commits behind head on master.

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

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #6034      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   48.37%   48.37%   -0.01%     
==========================================
  Files         665      666       +1     
  Lines       54831    54835       +4     
==========================================
  Hits        26524    26524              
- Misses      26590    26593       +3     
- Partials     1717     1718       +1     

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	48.37% <100.00%> (-0.01%)	⬇️

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.

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

Thanks, @whitewindmills let me take a look.
/assign

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

This pr is similar to this logic processing scenario. Can we refer to this scenario:

karmada/pkg/detector/detector.go

Lines 459 to 464 in 8313813

	// If this binding exists and its owner is not the input object, return error and let garbage collector
	// delete this binding and try again later. See https://github.com/karmada-io/karmada/issues/2090.
	if ownerRef := metav1.GetControllerOfNoCopy(bindingCopy); ownerRef != nil && ownerRef.UID != object.GetUID() {
	return fmt.Errorf("failed to update binding due to different owner reference UID, will " +
	"try again later after binding is garbage collected, see https://github.com/karmada-io/karmada/issues/2090")
	}

[whitewindmills]

@XiShanYongYe-Chang PTAL

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

Thanks~

[whitewindmills]

@XiShanYongYe-Chang PTAL

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

Thanks~
/lgtm
Do you think we need to cherry-pick this patch to the previous branch?

/cc @RainbowMango

[whitewindmills]

Do you think we need to cherry-pick this patch to the previous branch?

yes, it's necessary.

[whitewindmills]

kindly ping @RainbowMango

[XiShanYongYe-Chang]

yes, it's necessary.

Can you help add a release note?

[RainbowMango]

/assign

[RainbowMango]

/approve

[karmada-bot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: RainbowMango

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

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [RainbowMango]

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

[RainbowMango]

I added a release note to this PR.

[whitewindmills]

@RainbowMango @XiShanYongYe-Chang
Which branch do you think I should start cherry-picking from?

[RainbowMango]

All maintains branches, release-1.12, release-1.11, and release-1.10.