[release-1.10] Fix AKS reconciliation of taints

[willie-yao]

What type of PR is this?
This is a manual cherry-pick of #4066

What this PR does / why we need it:

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #

Special notes for your reviewer:

• cherry-pick candidate

TODOs:

• squashed commits
• includes documentation
• adds unit tests

Release note:

Fix AKS reconciliation of taints

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified lines are covered by tests ✅

Comparison is base (520b5f8) 54.31% compared to head (9c92c88) 54.36%.
Report is 1 commits behind head on release-1.10.

Additional details and impacted files

@@               Coverage Diff                @@
##           release-1.10    #4127      +/-   ##
================================================
+ Coverage         54.31%   54.36%   +0.04%     
================================================
  Files               186      186              
  Lines             18874    18894      +20     
================================================
+ Hits              10252    10272      +20     
  Misses             8067     8067              
  Partials            555      555              

Files	Coverage Δ
azure/services/agentpools/spec.go	62.61% <100.00%> (+3.70%)	⬆️

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

[willie-yao]

/assign @nojnhuh

Looks like codespell is complaining about files I didn't change?

[nojnhuh]

/lgtm
/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: a967fa40b971fee6bb95b51ea7d3d26485a9f41a

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: nojnhuh

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 [nojnhuh]

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

[nawazkh]

PR #4136 should fix the codespell errors you see on this PR.

[nawazkh]

We need this merged before #4122 can be cherry-picked onto release-1.10.

[CecileRobertMichon]

PR #4136 should fix the codespell errors you see on this PR.

That PR is targetting main, will it need to be cherry-picked to fix the errors on the release-1.10 branch?

I don't fully understand how codespell broke in the release branch, shouldn't the action catch any spelling errors merged in cherry pick PRs? Is it because the new version that was released introduces new spelling errors and the github action is using latest?

[nawazkh]

That PR is targetting main, will it need to be cherry-picked to fix the errors on the release-1.10 branch?

We will need the typos in the .md file carried over from #4122 but not the codespell version update. #4122 is doing both of them.
I see that the make target, make verify-codespell is only present in main and release-1.11.
release-1.10 relies on the codespell github action.

I don't fully understand how codespell broke in the release branch, shouldn't the action catch any spelling errors merged in cherry pick PRs? Is it because the new version that was released introduces new spelling errors and the github action is using latest?

release-1.10 seem to be using codespell@master github action.
Whereas release-1.11 and main are using codespell v2.2.5 make target.

I tested the main branch with codespell v2.2.6 and I was able to see the same codespell errors we we see on this PR. So I am guessing the newer release of codespell added some improvements. And since release-1.10 uses master, the behavior is up-to-date.

---

This makes me wonder if we were better off maintaining codespell as a github action than having it maintained via a make target.

[CecileRobertMichon]

release-1.10 seem to be using codespell@master github action.
Whereas release-1.11 and main are using codespell v2.2.5 make target.

this explains it, thanks!

I remember this was a limitation of the githhub action, it just pulls codespell @ HEAD so it could break overnight.

This makes me wonder if we were better off maintaining codespell as a github action than having it maintained via a make target.

IMO the Makefile target is still an improvement because 1) developers can run it locally 2) we control the version bumps

We could try to backport the Makefile target switch to release-1.10 to make cherry-picks easier, or just backport the typo fixes for this one time. release-1.10 branch will fall out of support in less than a month with 1.12 comes out and it's unlikely there will be another codespell release by then.

[nawazkh]

Could a rebase help ?

[nawazkh]

/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 978ef5932cd289becb1f870af48eb1c43d25a7dc

[nojnhuh]

Thank you for the rebase!

/remove-label needs-rebase

[k8s-ci-robot]

@nojnhuh: The label(s) /remove-label needs-rebase cannot be applied. These labels are supported: api-review, tide/merge-method-merge, tide/merge-method-rebase, tide/merge-method-squash, team/katacoda, refactor. Is this label configured under labels -> additional_labels or labels -> restricted_labels in plugin.yaml?

In response to this:

Thank you for the rebase!

/remove-label needs-rebase

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/test-infra repository.

[nawazkh]

/test pull-cluster-api-provider-azure-e2e-v1beta1

[nojnhuh]

/retest