Skip to content

Store initialization errors for filters #38409

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

Merged
merged 5 commits into from
Jul 8, 2025

Conversation

gabedos
Copy link
Contributor

@gabedos gabedos commented Jul 2, 2025

What does this PR do?

Stores initialization errors while parsing and creating the filter programs

Motivation

Clients in the Agent are interested whether or not the filters were successfully created, hence, we need to store and expose this information when applicable.

CONTP-845

Describe how you validated your changes

Unit tests

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

N/A

Base automatically changed from gabedos/ad-migrate-regex-to-cel to main July 2, 2025 14:29
@gabedos gabedos force-pushed the gabedos/workloadfilter-store-init-errs branch from 91513af to 38c005e Compare July 2, 2025 14:45
@github-actions github-actions bot added team/container-platform The Container Platform Team medium review PR review might take time labels Jul 2, 2025
@gabedos gabedos added qa/done QA done before merge and regressions are covered by tests changelog/no-changelog labels Jul 2, 2025
@gabedos gabedos marked this pull request as ready for review July 2, 2025 14:52
@gabedos gabedos requested a review from a team as a code owner July 2, 2025 14:52
Copy link

cit-pr-commenter bot commented Jul 2, 2025

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 05a931f4-a7d9-4d4d-885e-0f1e72a6e670

Baseline: cac5cbf
Comparison: 4c0ed3a
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ Improvement(s) detected

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
docker_containers_cpu % cpu utilization -8.18 [-11.16, -5.19] 1 Logs

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu % cpu utilization +2.22 [+1.35, +3.10] 1 Logs
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput +1.08 [+1.02, +1.14] 1 Logs
ddot_logs memory utilization +0.68 [+0.59, +0.77] 1 Logs
otlp_ingest_metrics memory utilization +0.18 [-0.05, +0.40] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput +0.07 [-0.55, +0.69] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 egress throughput +0.04 [-0.55, +0.62] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load egress throughput +0.03 [-0.20, +0.27] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput +0.02 [-0.57, +0.60] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.02, +0.02] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput -0.01 [-0.31, +0.30] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput -0.02 [-0.60, +0.56] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput -0.02 [-0.64, +0.61] 1 Logs
otlp_ingest_logs memory utilization -0.04 [-0.16, +0.08] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency egress throughput -0.04 [-0.70, +0.62] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle memory utilization -0.11 [-0.18, -0.04] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 egress throughput -0.11 [-0.73, +0.51] 1 Logs
ddot_metrics memory utilization -0.19 [-0.29, -0.10] 1 Logs
file_tree memory utilization -0.25 [-0.36, -0.13] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders memory utilization -0.37 [-0.42, -0.33] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization -0.53 [-0.60, -0.46] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
docker_containers_memory memory utilization -0.91 [-1.06, -0.76] 1 Logs
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization -1.72 [-4.45, +1.01] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
docker_containers_cpu % cpu utilization -8.18 [-11.16, -5.19] 1 Logs

Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed links
docker_containers_cpu simple_check_run 9/10
docker_containers_memory memory_usage 10/10
docker_containers_memory simple_check_run 8/10
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 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 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs lost_bytes 10/10 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs memory_usage 10/10 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:

  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 intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate 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 intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr bot commented Jul 2, 2025

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor cac5cbf

Successful checks

Info

Quality gate Delta On disk size (MiB) Delta On wire size (MiB)
agent_deb_amd64 $${+0.02}$$ $${696.25}$$ < $${700.55}$$ $${-0.01}$$ $${175.89}$$ < $${177.62}$$
agent_deb_amd64_fips $${+0.01}$$ $${694.5}$$ < $${699.75}$$ $${-0.04}$$ $${175.35}$$ < $${177.04}$$
agent_heroku_amd64 $${+0.01}$$ $${349.12}$$ < $${362.84}$$ $${+0.01}$$ $${93.56}$$ < $${98.91}$$
agent_msi $${+0.04}$$ $${971.21}$$ < $${974.5}$$ $${-0.02}$$ $${147.24}$$ < $${148.11}$$
agent_rpm_amd64 $${+0.02}$$ $${696.24}$$ < $${700.53}$$ $${-0.02}$$ $${177.58}$$ < $${179.2}$$
agent_rpm_amd64_fips $${+0.01}$$ $${694.49}$$ < $${699.74}$$ $${-0.03}$$ $${177.27}$$ < $${178.75}$$
agent_rpm_arm64 $${+0.01}$$ $${686.45}$$ < $${690.5}$$ $${-0.02}$$ $${161.09}$$ < $${162.56}$$
agent_rpm_arm64_fips $${+0.01}$$ $${684.77}$$ < $${689.8}$$ $${-0.03}$$ $${160.14}$$ < $${161.61}$$
agent_suse_amd64 $${+0.02}$$ $${696.24}$$ < $${700.54}$$ $${-0.02}$$ $${177.58}$$ < $${179.2}$$
agent_suse_amd64_fips $${+0.01}$$ $${694.49}$$ < $${699.74}$$ $${-0.03}$$ $${177.27}$$ < $${178.93}$$
agent_suse_arm64 $${+0.01}$$ $${686.45}$$ < $${690.43}$$ $${-0.02}$$ $${161.09}$$ < $${162.57}$$
agent_suse_arm64_fips $${+0.01}$$ $${684.77}$$ < $${689.78}$$ $${-0.03}$$ $${160.14}$$ < $${161.61}$$
docker_agent_amd64 $${+0.02}$$ $${780.05}$$ < $${784.33}$$ $${-0.01}$$ $${268.65}$$ < $${270.56}$$
docker_agent_arm64 $${+0.01}$$ $${793.72}$$ < $${797.68}$$ $${+0.03}$$ $${256.07}$$ < $${257.84}$$
docker_agent_jmx_amd64 $${+0.02}$$ $${971.25}$$ < $${975.52}$$ $${+0.01}$$ $${337.62}$$ < $${339.53}$$
docker_agent_jmx_arm64 $${+0.01}$$ $${973.51}$$ < $${977.47}$$ $${-0.02}$$ $${320.99}$$ < $${322.81}$$
docker_agent_windows1809 $${+0.2}$$ $${1184.02}$$ < $${1190.0}$$ $${-0.04}$$ $${417.51}$$ < $${422.66}$$
docker_agent_windows1809_core $${-0.02}$$ $${5913.98}$$ < $${5919.41}$$ $${0}$$ $${2048.0}$$ < $${2049.0}$$
docker_agent_windows1809_core_jmx $${-0.02}$$ $${6035.55}$$ < $${6063.56}$$ $${0}$$ $${2048.0}$$ < $${2049.0}$$
docker_agent_windows1809_jmx $${-0.05}$$ $${1305.58}$$ < $${1311.1}$$ $${+0}$$ $${459.79}$$ < $${464.35}$$
docker_agent_windows2022 $${+0.08}$$ $${1203.19}$$ < $${1208.75}$$ $${+0.01}$$ $${430.25}$$ < $${434.91}$$
docker_agent_windows2022_core $${-0.18}$$ $${5887.1}$$ < $${5892.66}$$ $${0}$$ $${2048.0}$$ < $${2049.0}$$
docker_agent_windows2022_core_jmx $${-0.2}$$ $${6008.75}$$ < $${6014.08}$$ $${0}$$ $${2048.0}$$ < $${2049.0}$$
docker_agent_windows2022_jmx $${+0.07}$$ $${1324.9}$$ < $${1330.39}$$ $${+0}$$ $${472.55}$$ < $${477.17}$$
docker_cluster_agent_amd64 $${+0.01}$$ $${213.65}$$ < $${214.5}$$ $${+0.01}$$ $${72.62}$$ < $${73.51}$$
docker_cluster_agent_arm64 $${+0.06}$$ $${229.5}$$ < $${230.33}$$ $${+0}$$ $${68.89}$$ < $${69.77}$$
docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64 $${0}$$ $${7.07}$$ < $${7.12}$$ $${-0}$$ $${2.95}$$ < $${3.29}$$
docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64 $${0}$$ $${6.69}$$ < $${6.92}$$ $${+0}$$ $${2.7}$$ < $${3.07}$$
docker_dogstatsd_amd64 $${0}$$ $${39.21}$$ < $${39.57}$$ $${-0}$$ $${15.12}$$ < $${15.76}$$
docker_dogstatsd_arm64 $${-0}$$ $${37.88}$$ < $${38.2}$$ $${+0}$$ $${14.54}$$ < $${14.83}$$
dogstatsd_deb_amd64 $${0}$$ $${30.42}$$ < $${31.4}$$ $${-0}$$ $${8.0}$$ < $${8.95}$$
dogstatsd_deb_arm64 $${0}$$ $${28.99}$$ < $${29.97}$$ $${-0}$$ $${6.94}$$ < $${7.89}$$
dogstatsd_rpm_amd64 $${0}$$ $${30.42}$$ < $${31.4}$$ $${+0}$$ $${8.01}$$ < $${8.96}$$
dogstatsd_suse_amd64 $${0}$$ $${30.42}$$ < $${31.4}$$ $${+0}$$ $${8.01}$$ < $${8.96}$$
iot_agent_deb_amd64 $${+0.01}$$ $${53.78}$$ < $${54.55}$$ $${+0}$$ $${13.55}$$ < $${14.45}$$
iot_agent_deb_arm64 $${+0.01}$$ $${51.12}$$ < $${51.9}$$ $${+0}$$ $${11.73}$$ < $${12.63}$$
iot_agent_deb_armhf $${+0.01}$$ $${50.63}$$ < $${51.42}$$ $${-0.03}$$ $${11.81}$$ < $${12.74}$$
iot_agent_rpm_amd64 $${+0.01}$$ $${53.78}$$ < $${54.55}$$ $${+0}$$ $${13.57}$$ < $${14.47}$$
iot_agent_rpm_arm64 $${+0.01}$$ $${51.12}$$ < $${51.91}$$ $${+0}$$ $${11.75}$$ < $${12.65}$$
iot_agent_suse_amd64 $${+0.01}$$ $${53.78}$$ < $${54.55}$$ $${+0}$$ $${13.57}$$ < $${14.47}$$

@gabedos gabedos requested a review from Copilot July 4, 2025 23:10
Copy link
Contributor

@Copilot Copilot AI left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Pull Request Overview

This PR adds support for capturing and exposing initialization errors when creating filter programs, allowing clients to inspect filter construction failures.

  • Extended the FilterProgram interface and CELProgram struct to store initialization errors.
  • Updated createProgramFromOldFilters to return errors and propagated them through catalog constructors.
  • Introduced GetContainerFilterInitializationErrors in the filter implementation and added tests for initialization error handling.

Reviewed Changes

Copilot reviewed 11 out of 11 changed files in this pull request and generated no comments.

Show a summary per file
File Description
comp/core/workloadfilter/program/common.go Added GetInitializationErrors to the FilterProgram interface.
comp/core/workloadfilter/program/cel_program.go Stored initialization errors in CELProgram and implemented getter.
comp/core/workloadfilter/impl/filter.go Added GetContainerFilterInitializationErrors and helper function.
comp/core/workloadfilter/impl/filter_test.go Added unit tests for initialization error retrieval.
comp/core/workloadfilter/def/utils.go Added FlattenFilterSets utility.
comp/core/workloadfilter/def/component.go Exposed GetContainerFilterInitializationErrors on Component.
comp/core/workloadfilter/catalog/utils.go Changed createProgramFromOldFilters to return (cel.Program, error).
comp/core/workloadfilter/catalog/kube_service.go Captured init errors in service CEL programs.
comp/core/workloadfilter/catalog/kube_endpoints.go Captured init errors in endpoints CEL programs.
comp/core/workloadfilter/catalog/container.go Captured init errors in container CEL programs.
Comments suppressed due to low confidence (3)

comp/core/workloadfilter/def/component.go:22

  • [nitpick] The parameter name filter is singular but represents a slice; consider renaming it to filters for clarity.
	GetContainerFilterInitializationErrors(filter []ContainerFilter) []error

comp/core/workloadfilter/catalog/utils.go:25

  • The code uses fmt.Errorf but the fmt package is not imported; add import "fmt" to the imports.
		return nil, fmt.Errorf("error converting filters: %w", err)

comp/core/workloadfilter/def/utils.go:92

  • [nitpick] Pre-calculate the total length of all filter sets and allocate flattened with a capacity to avoid multiple reallocations.
	flattened := make([]T, 0)

@gabedos gabedos added this to the 7.69.0 milestone Jul 8, 2025
@gabedos
Copy link
Contributor Author

gabedos commented Jul 8, 2025

/merge

@dd-devflow-routing-codex
Copy link

dd-devflow-routing-codex bot commented Jul 8, 2025

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2025-07-08 17:45:11 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge


2025-07-08 17:45:30 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The expected merge time in main is approximately 49m (p90).


2025-07-08 18:25:46 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: This merge request was merged

@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot merged commit ffe129d into main Jul 8, 2025
246 checks passed
@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot deleted the gabedos/workloadfilter-store-init-errs branch July 8, 2025 18:25
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
changelog/no-changelog medium review PR review might take time qa/done QA done before merge and regressions are covered by tests team/container-platform The Container Platform Team
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants