1.30: Clean up PersistentVolumeLabel admission plugin

[jsafrane]

This is a manual fix of #124504 in release-1.30 branch.

#124504 was fixed in master by removing the admission plugin. IMO it's not a good idea to remove the plugin in already released version, so cleaning up the admission not to use the removed cloud provider.

What type of PR is this?

/kind bug
/kind regression

What this PR does / why we need it:

Azure and vSphere cloud providers were removed in v1.30. Remove their usage from PersistentVolumeLabel admission plugin, otherwise the admission plugin refuses creation of in-tree AzureDisk or vSphere volume.

Related to #124504, just fixing it in 1.30.

Special notes for your reviewer:

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

Fixed PersistentVolumeLabel admission plugin refusing in-tree Azure Disk and vSphere PersistentVolumes.

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

[jsafrane]

/sig storage
/priority imporant-soon
/triage accepted

[k8s-ci-robot]

@jsafrane: The label(s) priority/imporant-soon cannot be applied, because the repository doesn't have them.

In response to this:

/sig storage
/priority imporant-soon
/triage accepted

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.

[jsafrane]

/sig cloud-provider

[dims]

/approve
/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Git tree hash: 66df28ea8ccee50e84064f69ac8821ce10ea95c6

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dims, jsafrane

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:

• plugin/pkg/admission/storage/persistentvolume/label/OWNERS [dims]

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

[liggitt]

The admission plugin is not on by default… isn't the more correct adjustment for azure / vsphere clusters to not enable it in 1.30+?

what happens if it is enabled in those clusters with this PR removing the azure / vsphere implementations?

Edit: I guess we hit the "Unrecognized volume, do not add any labels" case… I guess either deleting the code like this or the cluster stopping using the admission plugin seems ok

[jsafrane]

@liggitt we're removing the admission plugin in 1.31: #124504

And AWS has been removed from the admission plugin in 1.27 (?) without anyone noticing. I admit, it should have been handled (and announced) better.