Andrew.glaude/cherry pick docker extravaganza#51249
Conversation
…ssPools Some Docker daemons emit "invalid Prefix" (the String() output of an invalid netip.Prefix) for DefaultAddressPools[].Base in the /info response. The moby v29 client (adopted in #48777) decodes Base into a typed netip.Prefix and rejects such values, aborting the entire /info JSON decode. This cascaded into DockerUtil init failures, hostname provider failures, missing host tags and metadata, and in containerized environments without DD_HOSTNAME could prevent the Agent from starting. Add a safeInfo helper that falls back to a raw HTTP /info request and decodes into a mirror struct shadowing DefaultAddressPools with a json.RawMessage. The fallback is gated on the SDK's JSON-decode error prefix and only engages when needed; the SDK's happy path is unchanged. Refactor host_tags.go to extract a pure buildSwarmTags helper so the test no longer needs to mock the client.SystemAPIClient interface. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Lead with the user-visible symptom (the verbatim Agent log line) and the cascading effects on tags, host metadata and Agent startup. Drop the implementation details (struct/field names, moby v29 internals, CVE references) that are not useful to end users reading the changelog. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
Switch from context.Background() to t.Context() so the context is auto-cancelled when the test finishes (Go 1.24+). Matches the modern idiom already used in 21 other files across the repo. Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.7 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
|
@codex review |
|
|
Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Swish! ℹ️ About Codex in GitHubCodex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you
If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍. When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback". |
Files inventory check summaryFile checks results against ancestor 92a16ba9: Results for datadog-agent_7.81.0~devel.git.185.623e4f6.pipeline.114830198-1_amd64.deb:No change detected |
Static quality checks✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates Successful checksInfo
11 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)
|
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 92a16ba Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | docker_containers_cpu | % cpu utilization | +4.19 | [+1.24, +7.15] | 1 | Logs |
Fine details of change detection per experiment
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | docker_containers_cpu | % cpu utilization | +4.19 | [+1.24, +7.15] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | +1.42 | [+0.40, +2.45] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | otlp_ingest_logs | memory utilization | +0.55 | [+0.45, +0.65] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | memory utilization | +0.48 | [+0.22, +0.73] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics | memory utilization | +0.14 | [-0.06, +0.34] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | +0.04 | [-0.02, +0.10] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.03 | [-0.43, +0.49] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.08, +0.13] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.19, +0.20] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders | memory utilization | -0.01 | [-0.06, +0.04] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.44, +0.41] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.03 | [-0.18, +0.13] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_v3 | ingress throughput | -0.04 | [-0.24, +0.16] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | otlp_ingest_metrics | memory utilization | -0.05 | [-0.21, +0.11] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.05 | [-0.61, +0.50] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics_sum_delta | memory utilization | -0.16 | [-0.34, +0.02] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | -0.26 | [-0.31, -0.21] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics_sum_cumulativetodelta_exporter | memory utilization | -0.33 | [-0.57, -0.09] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | docker_containers_memory | memory utilization | -0.35 | [-0.45, -0.25] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | -0.36 | [-0.41, -0.31] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | -0.39 | [-0.61, -0.17] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_logs | memory utilization | -0.54 | [-0.60, -0.47] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | ddot_metrics_sum_cumulative | memory utilization | -0.70 | [-0.86, -0.54] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed
| perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | observed_value | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ✅ | docker_containers_cpu | simple_check_run | 10/10 | 650 ≥ 26 | |
| ✅ | docker_containers_memory | memory_usage | 10/10 | 250.53MiB ≤ 370MiB | |
| ✅ | docker_containers_memory | simple_check_run | 10/10 | 631 ≥ 26 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | 0.16GiB ≤ 1.20GiB | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | 0.20GiB ≤ 1.20GiB | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | 0.17GiB ≤ 1.20GiB | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | 0.18GiB ≤ 1.20GiB | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | intake_connections | 10/10 | 3 ≤ 4 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | 142.99MiB ≤ 147MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | total_bytes_received | 10/10 | 742.85KiB ≤ 819.20KiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | intake_connections | 10/10 | 2 ≤ 4 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | 432.45MiB ≤ 495MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | total_bytes_received | 10/10 | 1.12MiB ≤ 1.25MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | intake_connections | 10/10 | 3 ≤ 6 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 | 180.98MiB ≤ 195MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | total_bytes_received | 10/10 | 264.48MiB ≤ 292MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | cpu_usage | 10/10 | 388.23 ≤ 2000 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | intake_connections | 10/10 | 4 ≤ 6 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 | 387.74MiB ≤ 430MiB | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | missed_bytes | 10/10 | 0B = 0B | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_metrics_logs | total_bytes_received | 10/10 | 0.94GiB ≤ 1.04GiB | bounds checks dashboard |
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 memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check total_bytes_received: 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 total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
|
This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had activity in the past 15 days. It will be closed in 30 days if no further activity occurs. If this pull request is still relevant, adding a comment or pushing new commits will keep it open. Also, you can always reopen the pull request if you missed the window. Thank you for your contributions! |
What does this PR do?
combing #51128 and #51235 to test if this resolves our issues in system-tests
Motivation
Describe how you validated your changes
Additional Notes