feat: Use WMI to implement iSCSI API to reduce PowerShell overhead

[laozc]

What type of PR is this?
/kind feature

What this PR does / why we need it:
This PR leverages of WMI interfaces to replace the PowerShell functions for System APIs,
It improves the overall performance of csi-proxy.
Partially for #193

Which issue(s) this PR fixes:

Special notes for your reviewer:
This is part of serial changes for #193 breaking into per-API change.

Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?:

NONE

[k8s-ci-robot]

Hi @laozc. Thanks for your PR.

I'm waiting for a kubernetes-csi 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. Regular contributors should join the org to skip this step.

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.

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.

[carlory]

/ok-to-test

[laozc]

@andyzhangx Is Azure driver using iSCSI API? Could you verify this API as well?

[mauriciopoppe]

Seems like Azuredisk doesn't use ISCSI https://github.com/search?q=repo%3Akubernetes-sigs%2Fazuredisk-csi-driver%20iscsi&type=code

[laozc]

We have integration testing covering this feature but they don't seem to be enabled in our test pipelines.
The code change passed in my 22H2 machine.

PS C:\Users\Administrator\csi-proxy> $env:ENABLE_ISCSI_TESTS="TRUE"; $env:ETHERNET_NAME="Ethernet0 2"; go test -v -run "^\QTestIscsiAPIGroup\E$" github.com/kubernetes-csi/csi-proxy/integrationtests
=== RUN   TestIscsiAPIGroup
=== RUN   TestIscsiAPIGroup/List/Add/Remove_TargetPortal_(Port=3260)
=== RUN   TestIscsiAPIGroup/List/Add/Remove_TargetPortal_(Port_not_mentioned,_effectively_3260)
=== RUN   TestIscsiAPIGroup/Discover_Target_and_Connect/Disconnect_(No_CHAP)
=== RUN   TestIscsiAPIGroup/Discover_Target_and_Connect/Disconnect_(CHAP)
=== RUN   TestIscsiAPIGroup/Discover_Target_and_Connect/Disconnect_(Mutual_CHAP)
=== RUN   TestIscsiAPIGroup/Full_flow
--- PASS: TestIscsiAPIGroup (64.87s)
    --- PASS: TestIscsiAPIGroup/List/Add/Remove_TargetPortal_(Port=3260) (10.05s)
    --- PASS: TestIscsiAPIGroup/List/Add/Remove_TargetPortal_(Port_not_mentioned,_effectively_3260) (9.92s)
    --- PASS: TestIscsiAPIGroup/Discover_Target_and_Connect/Disconnect_(No_CHAP) (10.10s)
    --- PASS: TestIscsiAPIGroup/Discover_Target_and_Connect/Disconnect_(CHAP) (10.56s)
    --- PASS: TestIscsiAPIGroup/Discover_Target_and_Connect/Disconnect_(Mutual_CHAP) (11.34s)
    --- PASS: TestIscsiAPIGroup/Full_flow (10.97s)
PASS
ok      github.com/kubernetes-csi/csi-proxy/integrationtests    64.936s

Could we say the PR works great based on the testing result,
as the API calls are pretty straightforward in this PR?

[mauriciopoppe]

lgtm minus a comment about errors

[mauriciopoppe]

/approve

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: laozc, mauriciopoppe

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 [mauriciopoppe]

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

[mauriciopoppe]

/lgtm