[CWS] Resolve context using pid for CgroupTracing events #32652
Conversation
lebauce
added
changelog/no-changelog
team/agent-security
qa/done
github-actions
bot
added
component/system-probe
medium review
lebauce
force-pushed
the
lebauce/cgroup-tracing-pid
branch
2 times, most recently
from
054f1bc to
01de635
Compare
lebauce
force-pushed
the
lebauce/cgroup-tracing-pid
branch
from
01de635 to
87b6902
Compare
Uncompressed package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision✅ Passed |
Test changes on VMUse this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM: inv aws.create-vm --pipeline-id=52649572 --os-family=ubuntuNote: This applies to commit 034f9a9 |
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 9602c5b Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | +1.87 | [-1.39, +5.12] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.56 | [+0.52, +0.60] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.51 | [+0.43, +0.58] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.28 | [-0.50, +1.07] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | +0.04 | [-0.84, +0.92] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.04 | [-0.63, +0.70] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.62, +0.66] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.92, +0.95] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.12, +0.11] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -0.02 | [-0.11, +0.07] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | -0.06 | [-0.90, +0.78] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | -0.07 | [-0.20, +0.06] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.07 | [-0.85, +0.71] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | -0.14 | [-0.60, +0.32] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | -2.32 | [-2.98, -1.65] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed
| perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 |
Explanation
Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%
Performance changes are noted in the perf column of each table:
- ✅ = significantly better comparison variant performance
- ❌ = significantly worse comparison variant performance
- ➖ = no significant change in performance
A regression test is an A/B test of target performance in a repeatable rig, where "performance" is measured as "comparison variant minus baseline variant" for an optimization goal (e.g., ingress throughput). Due to intrinsic variability in measuring that goal, we can only estimate its mean value for each experiment; we report uncertainty in that value as a 90.00% confidence interval denoted "Δ mean % CI".
For each experiment, we decide whether a change in performance is a "regression" -- a change worth investigating further -- if all of the following criteria are true:
-
Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.
-
Its 90.00% confidence interval "Δ mean % CI" does not contain zero, indicating that if our statistical model is accurate, there is at least a 90.00% chance there is a difference in performance between baseline and comparison variants.
-
Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".
CI Pass/Fail Decision
✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
lebauce
force-pushed
the
lebauce/cgroup-tracing-pid
branch
from
87b6902 to
7173cae
Compare
|
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
|
/remove |
Devflow running:
|
lebauce
force-pushed
the
lebauce/cgroup-tracing-pid
branch
from
7173cae to
bc2e512
Compare
lebauce
force-pushed
the
lebauce/cgroup-tracing-pid
branch
from
bc2e512 to
034f9a9
Compare
|
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
What does this PR do?
Add
pidto CgroupTracing events and use it to resolve process, cgroup and container contexts.Motivation
Using the cgroup file to resolve the context for this event type only introduces subtle bugs when
resolution fails. Using the generic PID based resolution makes use of a safer codepath.
Describe how you validated your changes
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Additional Notes