Update kubernetes patches used in etcd-k8s coverage tests

[AwesomePatrol]

Same as #21445 before

First seen in: https://prow.k8s.io/view/gs/kubernetes-ci-logs/logs/ci-etcd-k8s-coverage-amd64/2051621068765925376

/cc @serathius

[codecov]

Codecov Report

✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests.
✅ Project coverage is 70.27%. Comparing base (36e2dbd) to head (2713496).
⚠️ Report is 2 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

see 28 files with indirect coverage changes

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main   #21716      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   70.29%   70.27%   -0.03%     
==========================================
  Files         426      426              
  Lines       35139    35139              
==========================================
- Hits        24702    24694       -8     
- Misses       9043     9048       +5     
- Partials     1394     1397       +3     

---

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 36e2dbd...2713496. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

• ❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: AwesomePatrol, serathius

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:

• OWNERS [serathius]

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

[Jefftree]

It seems like a maintenance burden to constantly update these. Have we considered upstreaming some of patches as config options?

[AwesomePatrol]

It seems like a maintenance burden to constantly update these. Have we considered upstreaming some of patches as config options?

Yes, it was considered. We decided to wait and observe how much burden it actually is. I expected one CL per year, but apparently it is much more. Still, it adds up to 3x (5m my time, 5m reviewer time) ~ 30m so far which is much less than O(1h) required to go through kubernetes review pipeline