Add support for rolebindings

[kaitoii11]

What this PR does / why we need it:
Adds support for generating metrics for clusterrolebindings and rolebindings

How does this change affect the cardinality of KSM: (increases, decreases or does not change cardinality)

Which issue(s) this PR fixes (optional, in fixes #<issue number>(, fixes #<issue_number>, ...) format, will close the issue(s) when PR gets merged):
Fixes #1717

[mrueg]

/lgtm

/hold
for @dgrisonnet and @fpetkovski to review.

[fpetkovski]

/lgtm

[k8s-ci-robot]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: fpetkovski, kaitoii11, mrueg

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 [fpetkovski,mrueg]

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

[dgrisonnet]

I wonder if we should really have these exposed by default. The use cases for this kind of metric seem really niche to me and I wouldn't want to add even more timeseries to the default setup if it is not really useful to the majority of ksm users. Same comment can be applied to the recently added role and clusterrole since they are not part of a release yet, we can still afford to remove them from the default if deemed meaningful.

Any thoughts on that @fpetkovski @mrueg?

[fpetkovski]

I think not exposing them by default makes sense. I agree that the amount of metrics has crept up over time and we can do a better job at providing sane defaults.

[mrueg]

sounds good to have standard set, should we resolve that in a follow-up PR since it will affect other resources as well?

[kaitoii11]

So for this PR, should I remove this line?

[mrueg]

No all good, we will continue in a follow up PR!

[mrueg]

/hold cancel

[mrueg]

Thanks a lot for your contribution!