⚠️ move loadbalancer opts to struct

[apricote]

What this PR does / why we need it:

Modify the v1beta1 CRD and move the loadbalancer fields OpenStackClusterSpec.{ManagedAPIServerLoadBalancer,APIServerLoadBalancerAdditionalPorts} into a struct at OpenStackClusterSpec.APIServerLoadBalancer to enable adding further customizations. This was previously discussed in #1105.

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Related to #1105

Special notes for your reviewer:

1. Please confirm that if this PR changes any image versions, then that's the sole change this PR makes.

TODOs:

• squashed commits
• if necessary:
  • includes documentation
  • adds unit tests

/hold

[netlify]

✅ Deploy Preview for kubernetes-sigs-cluster-api-openstack ready!

Name	Link
🔨 Latest commit	8c4352c
🔍 Latest deploy log	https://app.netlify.com/sites/kubernetes-sigs-cluster-api-openstack/deploys/62458df4a98a9b000823df58
😎 Deploy Preview	https://deploy-preview-1187--kubernetes-sigs-cluster-api-openstack.netlify.app
📱 Preview on mobile	Toggle QR Code... Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

---

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

[jichenjc]

Thanks for the PR, I assume you need update templates/*.yaml (e.g cluster-template.yaml) and maybe e2e settings
in order to honor the new things introduced?

[apricote]

I just pushed an update that contains:

• Unit tests for the conversions
• Fixed OpenStackCluster manifests in templates/ and test/data/infrastructure-openstack
• updated generated conversions (make generate)

[jichenjc]

/lgtm

thanks for the fix ~

[mdbooth]

This is a really nice cleanup.

/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: apricote, mdbooth

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 [mdbooth]

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

[apricote]

/hold cancel

[apricote]

Looks like a flaky test, was previously successful on the same commit.

/retest

[chrischdi]

What's the reason for using unsafe here? couldn't it be as easy as the following?:

Suggested change

	AdditionalPorts: *(*[]int)(unsafe.Pointer(&in.APIServerLoadBalancerAdditionalPorts)),
	AdditionalPorts: in.APIServerLoadBalancerAdditionalPorts,

[chrischdi]

What's the reason for using unsafe here? couldn't it be as easy as the following?:

Suggested change

	out.APIServerLoadBalancerAdditionalPorts = *(*[]int)(unsafe.Pointer(&in.APIServerLoadBalancer.AdditionalPorts))
	out.APIServerLoadBalancerAdditionalPorts = in.APIServerLoadBalancer.AdditionalPorts

[apricote]

I was too slow with answering, not its merged :(

I copied this from the previous autogenerated conversion.

The code is coming from conversion-gen: https://github.com/kubernetes/code-generator/blob/7e38d5771c5636f13555f0058e5936c521d2fe13/cmd/conversion-gen/generators/conversion.go#L929

[chrischdi]

So this whole part is auto generated? If so we have to keep it, otherwise I would prefer to clean it up in a follow-up PR :-)

[apricote]

Nope, my changes are not auto-generated, but I did not understand the semantics of the conversion code enough to remove the unsafe.Pointer logic provided by conversion-gen.