Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

[CWS] make exec event document clearer #33783

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 7, 2025
Merged

Conversation

safchain
Copy link
Contributor

@safchain safchain commented Feb 6, 2025

What does this PR do?

Motivation

Describe how you validated your changes

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Additional Notes

@safchain safchain added changelog/no-changelog team/agent-security qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation labels Feb 6, 2025
@safchain safchain requested review from a team as code owners February 6, 2025 13:27
@safchain safchain force-pushed the safchain/fix-exec-doc branch from f5e5c13 to fbc63b0 Compare February 6, 2025 13:27
@github-actions github-actions bot added the short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly label Feb 6, 2025
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Feb 6, 2025

Uncompressed package size comparison

Comparison with ancestor c6130409375ca2fc96ba6ea61a37fe9fd6b3c183

Diff per package
package diff status size ancestor threshold
datadog-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 873.62MB 873.62MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 883.36MB 883.36MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 883.36MB 883.36MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-aarch64-rpm 0.00MB 871.22MB 871.22MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-arm64-deb 0.00MB 861.50MB 861.50MB 0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-amd64-deb 0.00MB 59.10MB 59.10MB 0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 59.18MB 59.18MB 0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 59.18MB 59.18MB 0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-arm64-deb 0.00MB 56.57MB 56.57MB 0.50MB
datadog-heroku-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 446.05MB 446.05MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 86.48MB 86.48MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 86.55MB 86.55MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 86.55MB 86.55MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-arm64-deb 0.00MB 82.74MB 82.74MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-aarch64-rpm 0.00MB 82.81MB 82.81MB 0.50MB

Decision

✅ Passed

@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Feb 6, 2025

Test changes on VM

Use this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM:

inv aws.create-vm --pipeline-id=55262327 --os-family=ubuntu

Note: This applies to commit 8c70043

@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Feb 6, 2025

Static quality checks ✅

Please find below the results from static quality gates

Info

Result Quality gate On disk size On disk size limit On wire size On wire size limit
static_quality_gate_agent_deb_amd64 845.09MiB 858.45MiB 203.6MiB 214.3MiB
static_quality_gate_docker_agent_amd64 929.28MiB 942.69MiB 310.7MiB 321.56MiB

Copy link

cit-pr-commenter bot commented Feb 6, 2025

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 20e1ea75-c00e-4d07-a8c9-b47881d6eed1

Baseline: c613040
Comparison: 8c70043
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization +0.26 [-0.61, +1.14] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput +0.16 [-0.63, +0.95] 1 Logs
file_tree memory utilization +0.11 [+0.04, +0.17] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 egress throughput +0.07 [-0.84, +0.97] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization +0.07 [+0.01, +0.13] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory utilization +0.06 [+0.02, +0.09] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput +0.04 [-0.84, +0.91] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput +0.03 [-0.60, +0.66] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.02, +0.03] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.25, +0.25] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 egress throughput -0.01 [-0.86, +0.83] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency egress throughput -0.04 [-0.67, +0.60] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load egress throughput -0.28 [-0.73, +0.18] 1 Logs
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -0.78 [-0.85, -0.71] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput -0.82 [-1.59, -0.04] 1 Logs
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization -1.19 [-4.25, +1.88] 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 intake_connections 10/10 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory_usage 10/10 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features intake_connections 10/10 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory_usage 10/10 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs intake_connections 10/10
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:

  1. Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.

  2. 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.

  3. Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".

CI Pass/Fail Decision

Passed. All Quality Gates passed.

  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 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, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@safchain safchain added the ask-review Ask required teams to review this PR label Feb 6, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@drichards-87 drichards-87 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Left some minor suggestions from Docs and approved the PR.

docs/cloud-workload-security/linux_expressions.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@@ -572,7 +572,7 @@ A DNS request was sent

### Event `exec`

A process was executed or forked
A process was executed. Doesn't trigger on fork syscalls
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
A process was executed. Doesn't trigger on fork syscalls
A process was executed. This event does not trigger on fork syscalls.

@@ -2007,7 +2007,7 @@
},
{
"name": "exec",
"definition": "A process was executed or forked",
"definition": "A process was executed. Doesn't trigger on fork syscalls",
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
"definition": "A process was executed. Doesn't trigger on fork syscalls",
"definition": "A process was executed (does not trigger on fork syscalls).",

@github-actions github-actions bot added medium review PR review might take time and removed short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly labels Feb 6, 2025
@safchain safchain force-pushed the safchain/fix-exec-doc branch from 31982e3 to 8c70043 Compare February 7, 2025 15:44
@safchain
Copy link
Contributor Author

safchain commented Feb 7, 2025

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented Feb 7, 2025

Devflow running: /merge

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.


2025-02-07 16:58:25 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The median merge time in main is 29m.


2025-02-07 17:35:39 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: This merge request was merged

@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot merged commit 66e8bfa into main Feb 7, 2025
237 checks passed
@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot deleted the safchain/fix-exec-doc branch February 7, 2025 17:35
@github-actions github-actions bot added this to the 7.64.0 milestone Feb 7, 2025
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ask-review Ask required teams to review this PR changelog/no-changelog component/system-probe medium review PR review might take time qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation team/agent-security
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants