DRA Device Binding Conditions: graduate to beta

[ttsuuubasa]

What type of PR is this?

/kind feature
/kind api-change
/sig scheduling
/wg device-management

What this PR does / why we need it:

This PR graduates the DRADeviceBindingConditions feature gate from Alpha to Beta in Kubernetes v1.36, enabling it by default.

Which issue(s) this PR is related to:

KEP: kubernetes/enhancements#5007

Special notes for your reviewer:

This feature is considered to have met the Beta criteria based on the merged code PRs, as well as feedback and discussions with DRA driver vendors and maintainers.

• metrics
  To satisfy the PRR requirements of KEP-5007, the required metrics were implemented in the following PRs, enabling better observability and validation of the feature’s behavior.

  • DRA Device Binding Conditions: add metrics for prebind flow #137284

• feedback from DRA Driver vendor
  We implemented Device Binding Conditions support for the ComputeDomain provided by the NVIDIA DRA Driver and published the corresponding PR.

  • feat: implement Device Binding Conditions for ComputeDomain kubernetes-sigs/dra-driver-nvidia-gpu#855

  Based on feedback from the vendor maintainers, concerns were raised about potential performance issues with a centralized architecture in which the controller responsible for setting BindingConditions resides on the controller side.

  In response, we discussed possible approaches for realizing a distributed architecture - where the controller logic is placed on the worker side - with SIG Scheduling maintainers in the Slack thread referenced below.

  • https://kubernetes.slack.com/archives/C09TP78DV/p1772618881142109

  Incorporating the proposed solutions from those discussions, we completed the implementation of ComputeDomain with BindingConditions using a distributed architecture.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?

DRA: graduate Device Binding Conditions (KEP #5007) to beta. The feature is now enabled by default in v1.36.

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

- [KEP]: https://github.com/kubernetes/enhancements/issues/5007

[k8s-ci-robot]

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.

Details

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.

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @ttsuuubasa. 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.

Tip

We noticed you've done this a few times! Consider joining the org to skip this step and gain /lgtm and other bot rights. We recommend asking approvers on your previous PRs to sponsor you.

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.

Details

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.

[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.

[ttsuuubasa]

/cc @pohly @dom4ha @macsko @johnbelamaric

[dom4ha]

/approve

[pohly]

/test pull-kubernetes-node-e2e-containerd

Unrelated flake.

[ttsuuubasa]

@pohly
Unit tests and integration tests are already passing.
Enabling DRADeviceBindingConditions by default turned out to require changes across a broader set of test cases than initially expected.

I have submitted an Exception request today. If it is approved, we will have an additional 3 days.

I would appreciate it if you could continue with the review in the meantime.

[pohly]

/lgtm
/approve

Swapping the defaults for feature enabled/disabled in the scheduler plugin test cases looks reasonable. Once those features are always enabled, only a few test cases need to be updated.

/label api-review
/cc @liggitt

For doc changes.

[k8s-ci-robot]

LGTM label has been added.

Details

Git tree hash: 2c238bb160f1c324b5e77cd7a140f456c58a7251

[liggitt]

/approve
for API comment changes

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: dom4ha, liggitt, pohly, ttsuuubasa

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

The pull request process is described here

Details

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• api/OWNERS [liggitt]
• cmd/kube-scheduler/OWNERS [dom4ha,liggitt]
• pkg/apis/OWNERS [liggitt]
• pkg/features/OWNERS [dom4ha,liggitt,pohly]
• pkg/generated/openapi/OWNERS [liggitt]
• pkg/scheduler/OWNERS [dom4ha,liggitt]
• staging/src/k8s.io/api/OWNERS [liggitt]
• staging/src/k8s.io/client-go/applyconfigurations/OWNERS [liggitt]
• test/compatibility_lifecycle/reference/OWNERS [dom4ha,liggitt,pohly]
• test/integration/dra/OWNERS [liggitt,pohly]
• test/integration/scheduler_perf/OWNERS [dom4ha,liggitt,pohly]

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