Add expand support

[bertinatto]

Is this a bug fix or adding new feature?

/kind feature

What is this PR about? / Why do we need it?

This PR adds partial support for volume expanding.

It doesn't add the resizer to the manifest file on purpose, so we can keep working on this without exposing the feature to people that try out the driver.

Fixes #146.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: bertinatto

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 [bertinatto]

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

[bertinatto]

The sanity error is already fixed in csi-test: kubernetes-csi/csi-test@455ebbf

[coveralls]

Pull Request Test Coverage Report for Build 671

• 92 of 137 (67.15%) changed or added relevant lines in 3 files are covered.
• 1 unchanged line in 1 file lost coverage.
• Overall coverage decreased (-0.3%) to 71.22%

---

Changes Missing Coverage	Covered Lines	Changed/Added Lines	%
pkg/driver/controller.go	19	23	82.61%
pkg/cloud/cloud.go	73	88	82.95%
pkg/driver/node.go	0	26	0.0%

Files with Coverage Reduction	New Missed Lines	%
pkg/cloud/cloud.go	1	75.94%

Totals
Change from base Build 657:	-0.3%
Covered Lines:	1168
Relevant Lines:	1640

---

💛 - Coveralls

[bertinatto]

/retest

[bertinatto]

/test pull-aws-ebs-csi-driver-e2e-single-az

[bertinatto]

/test pull-aws-ebs-csi-driver-e2e-single-az

[bertinatto]

/test pull-aws-ebs-csi-driver-e2e-multi-az

[bertinatto]

It seems I cannot find the change for manifest to add the resizer? could you add the resizer in manifest?

I was hoping to leave the manifest out for now to avoid exposing the feature before it's ready (see the PR's description). However, I understand it might be hard to test it, so I just added it.

[leakingtapan]

I was hoping to leave the manifest out for now to avoid exposing the feature before it's ready (see the PR's description). However, I understand it might be hard to test it, so I just added it.

Good point. How about we add the resizer into the helm chat and make it configurable (like what I did for volume scheduling. )

The advantage is we can keep the manifest to only expose the stable features and use helm chart to expose alpha/unstable features. The drawback is we need to careful to keep both in sync

[bertinatto]

@leakingtapan: I opened #307 to discuss this. I think the idempotency of the node service should be fixed in a separate PR.

[bertinatto]

I was hoping to leave the manifest out for now to avoid exposing the feature before it's ready (see the PR's description). However, I understand it might be hard to test it, so I just added it.

Good point. How about we add the resizer into the helm chat and make it configurable (like what I did for volume scheduling. )

The advantage is we can keep the manifest to only expose the stable features and use helm chart to expose alpha/unstable features. The drawback is we need to careful to keep both in sync

Sounds good to me. Would it be acceptable to leave this out of this PR, though? Unfortunately I have a limited bandwidth at the moment, so I won't be able to tinker with helm soon.

[leakingtapan]

I can do the helm part.

Could you rebase the PR before the merge?

[bertinatto]

I can do the helm part.

Should I remove the manifest commit then?

Could you rebase the PR before the merge?

I think it's already rebased.

[leakingtapan]

Let's remove the manifest and squash the commits into one.
Sorry for the confusion

[bertinatto]

Let's remove the manifest and squash the commits into one.
Sorry for the confusion

Done

[leakingtapan]

/lgtm