Automatic merge from submit-queue (batch tested with PRs 58144, 57149). If you want to cherry-pick this change to another branch, please follow the instructions <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/cherry-picks.md">here</a>.
make quota reusable
Quota is logically a re-useable component so that replenishment and admission can be done in constituent servers. This makes it possible to embed. More cleanup is probably required, but this is the minimum.
Automatic merge from submit-queue. If you want to cherry-pick this change to another branch, please follow the instructions <a href="https://github.com/kubernetes/community/blob/master/contributors/devel/cherry-picks.md">here</a>.
[quota controller] remove extra queue.Add()
requeue immediately after an error may end-up with hot-loop
**Release note**:
```release-note
NONE
```
The resource quota controller worker pool can deadlock when:
* Worker goroutines are idle waiting for work from queues
* The Sync() method detects discovery updates to apply
The problem is workers acquire a read lock while idle, making write lock
acquisition dependent upon the presence of work in the queues.
The Sync() method blocks on a pending write lock acquisition and won't unblock
until every existing worker processes one item from their queue and releases
their read lock. While the Sync() method's lock is pending, all new read lock
acquisitions will block; if a worker does process work and release its lock, it
will then become blocked on a read lock acquisition; they become blocked on
Sync(). This can easily deadlock all the workers processing from one queue while
any workers on the other queue remain blocked waiting for work.
Fix the deadlock by refactoring workers to acquire a read lock *after* work is
popped from the queue. This allows writers to get locks while workers are idle,
while preserving the worker pause semantics necessary to allow safe sync.
Automatic merge from submit-queue
Curating Owners: pkg/controller
cc @jsafrane @mikedanese @bprashanth @derekwaynecarr @thockin @saad-ali
In an effort to expand the existing pool of reviewers and establish a
two-tiered review process (first someone **lgtms** and then someone
experienced in the project **approves**), we are adding new reviewers to
existing owners files.
## If You Care About the Process:
We did this by algorithmically figuring out who’s contributed code to
the project and in what directories. Unfortunately, that doesn’t work
perfectly: people that have made mechanical code changes (e.g change the
copyright header across all directories) end up as reviewers in lots of
places.
Instead of using pure commit data, we generated an excessively large
list of reviewers and pruned based on all time commit data, recent
commit data and review data (number of PRs commented on).
At this point we have a decent list of reviewers, but it needs one last
pass for fine tuning.
## TLDR:
As an owner of a sig/directory and a leader of the project, here’s what
we need from you:
1. Use PR https://github.com/kubernetes/kubernetes/pull/35715 as an example.
2. The pull-request is made editable, please edit the OWNERS file to add
the names of people that should be reviewing code in the future in the **reviewers** section. You probably do NOT need to modify the **approvers** section.
3. Notify me if you want some OWNERS file to be removed. Being an approver or reviewer
of a parent directory makes you a reviewer/approver of the subdirectories too, so not all
OWNERS files may be necessary.
4. Please use ALIAS if you want to use the same list of people over and
over again (don't hesitate to ask me for help, or use the pull-request
above as an example)
Kubernetes Submit Queue