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

Ensure IPC perm are updated #33666

Open
wants to merge 4 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Conversation

julien-lebot
Copy link
Contributor

What does this PR do?

This PR adds the missing ipc_perm.pem file to the list of files the installer should update the permission.

Motivation

All files should have their permissions updated when changing user.

Describe how you validated your changes

Covered in E2E test but with a big delta (detected this when LAST_STABLE was pointing to 7.62 when we are working on 7.64), so manual QA was also done.

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Additional Notes

@julien-lebot julien-lebot added os/windows changelog/no-changelog team/windows-agent qa/done QA done before merge and regressions are covered by tests labels Feb 3, 2025
@github-actions github-actions bot added the short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly label Feb 3, 2025
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Feb 3, 2025

Uncompressed package size comparison

Comparison with ancestor f6ffa8c13bd9e7b52b2caf2dfd59ab625a18dfe5

Diff per package
package diff status size ancestor threshold
datadog-agent-aarch64-rpm 0.00MB 874.72MB 874.72MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 877.21MB 877.21MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-arm64-deb 0.00MB 865.00MB 865.00MB 0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-amd64-deb 0.00MB 59.02MB 59.02MB 0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 59.10MB 59.10MB 0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 59.10MB 59.10MB 0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-arm64-deb 0.00MB 56.51MB 56.51MB 0.50MB
datadog-heroku-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 456.50MB 456.50MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB 93.87MB 93.87MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB 93.94MB 93.94MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-suse 0.00MB 93.94MB 93.94MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-arm64-deb 0.00MB 89.92MB 89.92MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-aarch64-rpm 0.00MB 89.99MB 89.99MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-rpm -0.00MB 886.95MB 886.95MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-suse -0.00MB 886.95MB 886.95MB 0.50MB

Decision

✅ Passed

@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Feb 3, 2025

[Fast Unit Tests Report]

On pipeline 54786149 (CI Visibility). The following jobs did not run any unit tests:

Jobs:
  • tests_deb-arm64-py3
  • tests_deb-x64-py3
  • tests_flavor_dogstatsd_deb-x64
  • tests_flavor_heroku_deb-x64
  • tests_flavor_iot_deb-x64
  • tests_rpm-arm64-py3
  • tests_rpm-x64-py3
  • tests_windows-x64

If you modified Go files and expected unit tests to run in these jobs, please double check the job logs. If you think tests should have been executed reach out to #agent-devx-help

Copy link

cit-pr-commenter bot commented Feb 3, 2025

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: f1edd3b1-81d3-4250-a9ad-1757d8df56ae

Baseline: f6ffa8c
Comparison: 1ac8cac
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization +0.48 [+0.42, +0.55] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory utilization +0.31 [+0.26, +0.35] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
file_tree memory utilization +0.06 [-0.01, +0.12] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput +0.03 [-0.84, +0.90] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput +0.02 [-0.76, +0.80] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput +0.02 [-0.77, +0.80] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.02 [-0.01, +0.04] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.27, +0.28] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput +0.00 [-0.63, +0.63] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 egress throughput +0.00 [-0.90, +0.90] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency egress throughput -0.00 [-0.64, +0.63] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 egress throughput -0.02 [-0.89, +0.85] 1 Logs
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -0.15 [-0.23, -0.07] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load egress throughput -0.49 [-0.95, -0.02] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization -1.26 [-2.14, -0.37] 1 Logs
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization -2.93 [-6.02, +0.17] 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, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, 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_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_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@julien-lebot julien-lebot marked this pull request as ready for review February 3, 2025 16:02
@julien-lebot julien-lebot requested a review from a team as a code owner February 3, 2025 16:03
@julien-lebot
Copy link
Contributor Author

@julien-lebot julien-lebot requested a review from a team as a code owner February 3, 2025 17:37
@julien-lebot julien-lebot added the ask-review Ask required teams to review this PR label Feb 3, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@buraizu buraizu left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Approving with a minor update requested

@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 3, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

@clarkb7 clarkb7 left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

The CleanupFiles action only runs on full uninstall, ConfigCustomActions.cs is what is deleting auth_token between installs and needs to be updated to remove ipc_cert.pem, too. See also its e2e test.

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 medium review PR review might take time os/windows qa/done QA done before merge and regressions are covered by tests team/windows-agent
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants