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] Allow specifying cgroup managers for dumps generation #32287

Merged
merged 14 commits into from
Dec 18, 2024

Conversation

lebauce
Copy link
Contributor

@lebauce lebauce commented Dec 17, 2024

What does this PR do?

Allow automatically generating activity dumps for systemd services.

Motivation

Currently, generating activity dumps for systemd services is supported but it's a manual step.
This PR allows to:

  • Automatically generate dumps for systemd services
  • Specify the cgroups for which we automatically generate the dumps.

Describe how you validated your changes

Set runtime_security_config.activity_dump.cgroup_managers to systemd and check that
activity dumps are only generated for systemd cgroups.

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Additional Notes

@lebauce lebauce added changelog/no-changelog team/agent-security qa/rc-required Only for a PR that requires validation on the Release Candidate labels Dec 17, 2024
@lebauce lebauce added this to the 7.63.0 milestone Dec 17, 2024
@lebauce lebauce requested a review from a team as a code owner December 17, 2024 11:09
@github-actions github-actions bot added component/system-probe long review PR is complex, plan time to review it labels Dec 17, 2024
Copy link

cit-pr-commenter bot commented Dec 17, 2024

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: d9b842ef-fe25-407f-8bc6-a43375d49edd

Baseline: 6d0ce2d
Comparison: 68b757a
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput +2.15 [+2.07, +2.22] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization +0.90 [+0.17, +1.63] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load egress throughput +0.58 [+0.11, +1.05] 1 Logs
otel_to_otel_logs ingress throughput +0.42 [-0.25, +1.10] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle memory utilization +0.23 [+0.18, +0.27] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 egress throughput +0.06 [-0.78, +0.91] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput +0.03 [-0.81, +0.87] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 egress throughput +0.02 [-0.88, +0.91] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.01 [-0.08, +0.11] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.01, +0.01] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency egress throughput -0.03 [-0.66, +0.61] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput -0.11 [-0.90, +0.67] 1 Logs
file_tree memory utilization -0.12 [-0.25, +0.02] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput -0.23 [-1.00, +0.54] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput -0.51 [-1.28, +0.26] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization -0.85 [-0.96, -0.73] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization -2.05 [-4.96, +0.86] 1 Logs

Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed links
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency lost_bytes 9/10
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 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:

  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 memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, 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_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@lebauce lebauce requested review from a team as code owners December 17, 2024 12:10
@lebauce lebauce force-pushed the lebauce/specify-cgroup-managers branch from 514e56b to d2bea12 Compare December 17, 2024 13:50
@lebauce lebauce removed request for a team and ankitpatel96 December 17, 2024 16:57
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Dec 17, 2024

Uncompressed package size comparison

Comparison with ancestor 6d0ce2d61353b6fca280b60e157c06642515fc9c

Diff per package
package diff status size ancestor threshold
datadog-agent-x86_64-rpm 0.13MB ⚠️ 1197.12MB 1197.00MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-suse 0.13MB ⚠️ 1197.12MB 1197.00MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-amd64-deb 0.13MB ⚠️ 1187.89MB 1187.76MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-aarch64-rpm 0.09MB ⚠️ 943.09MB 943.00MB 140.00MB
datadog-agent-arm64-deb 0.09MB ⚠️ 933.88MB 933.79MB 140.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-arm64-deb 0.01MB ⚠️ 55.79MB 55.79MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB ⚠️ 78.67MB 78.67MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-suse 0.00MB ⚠️ 78.67MB 78.67MB 10.00MB
datadog-dogstatsd-amd64-deb 0.00MB 78.59MB 78.59MB 10.00MB
datadog-heroku-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 505.05MB 505.05MB 70.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 113.31MB 113.31MB 10.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-arm64-deb 0.00MB 108.78MB 108.78MB 10.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-rpm -0.00MB 113.38MB 113.38MB 10.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-suse -0.00MB 113.38MB 113.38MB 10.00MB
datadog-iot-agent-aarch64-rpm -0.00MB 108.84MB 108.84MB 10.00MB

Decision

⚠️ Warning

@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Dec 17, 2024

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=51419230 --os-family=ubuntu

Note: This applies to commit 68b757a

go.mod Outdated
@@ -151,7 +151,7 @@ require (
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/gohai v0.56.0-rc.3
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/obfuscate v0.59.0
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/remoteconfig/state v0.59.0
github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/security/secl v0.56.0
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Do we really need that ? I think there is a replace anyway

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

👍

pkg/security/ebpf/c/include/helpers/activity_dump.h Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/security/ebpf/c/include/helpers/activity_dump.h Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/security/ebpf/c/include/maps.h Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/security/resolvers/process/resolver_ebpf.go Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/security/secl/containerutils/cgroup.go Show resolved Hide resolved
pkg/security/config/config.go Show resolved Hide resolved
@lebauce lebauce requested a review from a team as a code owner December 18, 2024 09:13
@lebauce lebauce requested a review from spikat December 18, 2024 09:13
@lebauce lebauce requested a review from paulcacheux December 18, 2024 09:13
@lebauce lebauce force-pushed the lebauce/specify-cgroup-managers branch from d3141cb to b1a96ef Compare December 18, 2024 09:15
@lebauce lebauce force-pushed the lebauce/specify-cgroup-managers branch from b1a96ef to 68b757a Compare December 18, 2024 09:53
@lebauce
Copy link
Contributor Author

lebauce commented Dec 18, 2024

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented Dec 18, 2024

Devflow running: /merge

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.


2024-12-18 16:32:41 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The median merge time in main is 27m.


2024-12-18 17:22:25 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: This merge request was merged

@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot merged commit 3b2649b into main Dec 18, 2024
232 checks passed
@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot deleted the lebauce/specify-cgroup-managers branch December 18, 2024 17:22
@github-actions github-actions bot modified the milestones: 7.63.0, 7.62.0 Dec 18, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog/no-changelog component/system-probe long review PR is complex, plan time to review it qa/rc-required Only for a PR that requires validation on the Release Candidate team/agent-security
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

4 participants