e2e: restructure e2e framework and its sub-packages to solve potential cycle imports

[kidlj]

What type of PR is this?

/kind cleanup
/kind api-change

What this PR does / why we need it:

Currently, many e2e functionalities are divided into sub packages from framework itself. The framework as a hub to its sub-packages must import some or all of these sub-packages to provide functionalitiies to test cases, however, some framework sub-packages import framework package back, notably to use framework.TestContext, its log and exec utils, framework.Namespace.Name etc, which may cause many potential circular imports to happen. See #81245

This PR did one thing: to avoid e2e framework sub-packages from importing framework package. To achieve this goal, this PR made these changes:

1. Move framework utils to framework/utils package; and change some of them to accept explicit arguments passed from framework instead of referencing *framework directly(notably f.ClientSet and f.Namespace.Name).
2. Move framework.TestContext to framework/config package.
3. Remove FrameworkBeforeEach(f *Framework) and FrameworkAfterEach(f *Framework) from ProviderInterface interface, since none of them is ever used.
4. Move framework.TimeoutContext to framework/config package.
5. Modify e2e tests to reflect on these changes.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Fixes #81245

Special notes for your reviewer:

Since it's huge, this PR serves as a POC of this refactoring to pass all tests; If it can be accepted, I would like to separate this PR into several sub-PRs for ease to review, and some more cleanup will be done later.

/cc @oomichi , @BenTheElder

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

NONE

But projects that import e2e framework or its sub-packages may face API changes.

Additional documentation e.g., KEPs (Kubernetes Enhancement Proposals), usage docs, etc.:

[k8s-ci-robot]

@kidlj: This issue is currently awaiting triage.

If a SIG or subproject determines 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.

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.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @kidlj. 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.

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.

[k8s-triage-robot]

This PR may require API review.

If so, when the changes are ready, complete the pre-review checklist and request an API review.

Status of requested reviews is tracked in the API Review project.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is NOT APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: kidlj
To complete the pull request process, please assign spiffxp after the PR has been reviewed.
You can assign the PR to them by writing /assign @spiffxp in a comment when ready.

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

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• build/OWNERS
• test/OWNERS

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

[kidlj]

/retest

[k8s-ci-robot]

@kidlj: The following test failed, say /retest to rerun all failed tests or /retest-required to rerun all mandatory failed tests:

Test name	Commit	Details	Required	Rerun command
pull-kubernetes-integration	a01742a	link	true	/test pull-kubernetes-integration

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard. Please help us cut down on flakes by linking to an open issue when you hit one in your PR.

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. I understand the commands that are listed here.

[liggitt]

I haven't looked at the changes in this PR, but did want to note an issue that a previous e2e framework refactor caused - #103697

Ginkgo is tricky enough to reason about that it's not always clear what side effects a refactor might have. Reviews of this PR should consider whether any of the changes could trigger something like #103697

[mauriciopoppe]

There was a PR that I worked on that stalled #100304 with a doc https://docs.google.com/document/d/12QckcyZpBzmgdQZ91h21co4J0rtoXIH76QJBgR1nD6Y/edit#heading=h.xmmbjkrz1oj9, I'd suggest writing one to have a better picture of the proposed change.

I'd also suggest to split the changes in multiple PRs for the reviewers, it's going to be hard keeping track of changes in +400 files.

[kidlj]

@mauriciopoppe Sure, thanks for the kind suggestion. This PR serves as a POC for the refactoring to pass all tests, so if it can be accepted, I would like to divide it into several sub-PRs, and with some documentations.

[aojea]

I'm -1 until we have a clear analysis of pros and cons, I personally had to spend a lot of time chasing flakes and bugs because of unexpected dependencies on test that broke on the previous refactor

[k8s-ci-robot]

@kidlj: PR 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.

[cici37]

/remove-sig api-machinery

[kidlj]

I'm -1 until we have a clear analysis of pros and cons, I personally had to spend a lot of time chasing flakes and bugs because of unexpected dependencies on test that broke on the previous refactor

I understand. But the circular imports issue from e2e core framework and its sub-package has been stuck for a long time, making writing tests kind of hard; and I don't see another way fixing it without refactoring. So how about we do it little by little, aspect by aspect, with detailed documentation and sub-PRs to fix this issue? If OK, I'd like to open a meta issue to manage the process. Thanks.

[logicalhan]

/remove-sig instrumentation

[aojea]

I understand. But the circular imports issue from e2e core framework and its sub-package has been stuck for a long time, making writing tests kind of hard; and I don't see another way fixing it without refactoring. So how about we do it little by little, aspect by aspect, with detailed documentation and sub-PRs to fix this issue? If OK, I'd like to open a meta issue to manage the process. Thanks.

yeah, I meant something like that, step by step and some place tracking the job done and remaining 😄

[kidlj]

This PR is way too large to review, and I opened an umbrella issue to track the process of this refactoring and hoped to do it little by little, if triage accepted. So please discuss it there and this PR will be closed.

/close

[k8s-ci-robot]

@kidlj: Closed this PR.

In response to this:

This PR is way too large to review, and I opened an umbrella issue to track the process of this refactoring and hoped to do it little by little, if triage accepted. So please discuss it there and this PR will be closed.

/close

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.