[master] Prevent using SyncWrapper with no reason

[vzhestkov]

What does this PR do?

It's not really clear if it was mate intentionally or just the parameter is missing by accident here.

Due to missing io_loop paramerer it's causing setting _run_io_loop_sync to True in SaltEvent object with:

salt/salt/utils/event.py

Lines 231 to 236 in e5eee2f

	if io_loop is not None:
	self.io_loop = io_loop
	self._run_io_loop_sync = False
	else:
	self.io_loop = None
	self._run_io_loop_sync = True

And that's why is using salt.utils.asynchronous.SyncWrapper here:

salt/salt/utils/event.py

Lines 322 to 331 in e5eee2f

	if self._run_io_loop_sync:
	if self.subscriber is None:
	self.subscriber = salt.utils.asynchronous.SyncWrapper(
	salt.transport.ipc_publish_client,
	args=(
	self.node,
	self.opts,
	),
	loop_kwarg="io_loop",
	)

What issues does this PR fix or reference?

Tracks: https://github.com/SUSE/spacewalk/issues/23526

Previous Behavior

SaltEvent is using salt.utils.asynchronous.SyncWrapper with the code which is intended to be used in async way.

New Behavior

salt.utils.asynchronous.SyncWrapper is not used, but direct async calls are used instead.

Merge requirements satisfied?

[NOTICE] Bug fixes or features added to Salt require tests.

• Docs
• Changelog - https://docs.saltproject.io/en/master/topics/development/changelog.html
• Tests written/updated

Commits signed with GPG?

Yes/No

Please review Salt's Contributing Guide for best practices, including the
PR Guidelines.

See GitHub's page on GPG signing for more information about signing commits with GPG.

[dwoz]

@vzhestkov
This change should likely be made in 3006.x and get merged forward.

[dwoz]

@vzhestkov This change should likely be made in 3006.x and get merged forward.

@vzhestkov ping