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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Jump to bottom

Change reported digest for containerd image layers to the rootfs diffid #33641

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 6, 2025
Merged

Change reported digest for containerd image layers to the rootfs diffid #33641

merged 1 commit into from
Feb 6, 2025

Conversation

sblumenthal
Copy link
Member

@sblumenthal sblumenthal commented Jan 31, 2025 •
edited
Loading

What does this PR do?

Change the value of the digest field associated with containerd image layers to that of the RootFS DiffIDs.

Motivation

https://dd.slack.com/archives/C4TQDFK1P/p1738256994492399
https://dd.slack.com/archives/C4TQDFK1P/p1738693120924119

This is already what is being used for docker and for cri-o, so this PR brings containerd in line with the other 2 container runtimes. It should also fix an issue where layer vulnerabilities are not properly being associated with the expected layers

Describe how you validated your changes

Full QA can be found here

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Additional Notes

@github-actions github-actions bot added short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly team/container-platform The Container Platform Team labels Jan 31, 2025
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

Uncompressed package size comparison

Comparison with ancestor 2d57ceaa0130a38de62b7db2081888917610047c

Diff per package
package diff status size ancestor threshold
datadog-dogstatsd-arm64-deb 0.00MB ✅ 56.50MB 56.50MB 0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB ✅ 59.09MB 59.09MB 0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-x86_64-suse 0.00MB ✅ 59.09MB 59.09MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB ✅ 877.18MB 877.18MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB ✅ 886.92MB 886.92MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-x86_64-suse 0.00MB ✅ 886.92MB 886.92MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-arm64-deb 0.00MB ✅ 864.97MB 864.97MB 0.50MB
datadog-agent-aarch64-rpm 0.00MB ✅ 874.69MB 874.69MB 0.50MB
datadog-dogstatsd-amd64-deb 0.00MB ✅ 59.02MB 59.02MB 0.50MB
datadog-heroku-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB ✅ 456.44MB 456.44MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-amd64-deb 0.00MB ✅ 93.83MB 93.83MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-rpm 0.00MB ✅ 93.90MB 93.90MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-x86_64-suse 0.00MB ✅ 93.90MB 93.90MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-arm64-deb 0.00MB ✅ 89.89MB 89.89MB 0.50MB
datadog-iot-agent-aarch64-rpm 0.00MB ✅ 89.96MB 89.96MB 0.50MB

Decision

✅ Passed

@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Contributor

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=54628555 --os-family=ubuntu

Note: This applies to commit c806a0b

@cit-pr-commenter cit-pr-commenter
Copy link

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 3730f304-f631-471a-af7c-a4b40fe0c774

Baseline: 2d57cea
Comparison: c806a0b
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 +0.65 [-0.21, +1.51] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load egress throughput +0.32 [-0.15, +0.79] 1 Logs
➖ quality_gate_idle memory utilization +0.17 [+0.12, +0.22] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖ file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput +0.09 [-0.68, +0.86] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput +0.04 [-0.75, +0.84] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput +0.02 [-0.73, +0.77] 1 Logs
➖ uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.01 [-0.28, +0.30] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput +0.01 [-0.91, +0.92] 1 Logs
➖ tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.01, +0.01] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 egress throughput -0.01 [-0.86, +0.84] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 egress throughput -0.02 [-0.90, +0.86] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency egress throughput -0.02 [-0.66, +0.61] 1 Logs
➖ tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -0.11 [-0.19, -0.03] 1 Logs
➖ file_tree memory utilization -0.13 [-0.20, -0.06] 1 Logs
➖ quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization -0.23 [-0.31, -0.16] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖ quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization -0.25 [-3.31, +2.80] 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_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.
  • 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_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@sblumenthal sblumenthal added team/containers qa/done QA done before merge and regressions are covered by tests labels Feb 6, 2025
@sblumenthal sblumenthal added this to the 7.64.0 milestone Feb 6, 2025
@sblumenthal sblumenthal marked this pull request as ready for review February 6, 2025 20:54
@sblumenthal sblumenthal requested a review from a team as a code owner February 6, 2025 20:54
gabedos
gabedos approved these changes Feb 6, 2025
View reviewed changes
Copy link
Contributor

@gabedos gabedos left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

lgtm, makes sense

@sblumenthal
Copy link
Member Author

/merge

@dd-devflow
Copy link

dd-devflow bot commented Feb 6, 2025 •
edited
Loading

Devflow running: /merge

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2025-02-06 21:24:34 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The median merge time in main is 29m.

2025-02-06 21:51:42 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: This merge request was merged

@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot merged commit e0da7dd into main Feb 6, 2025
267 of 271 checks passed
@dd-mergequeue dd-mergequeue bot deleted the sblumenthal/containerd-layers-diff-id branch February 6, 2025 21:51
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Reviewers

@gabedos gabedos gabedos approved these changes

Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
changelog/no-changelog qa/done QA done before merge and regressions are covered by tests short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly team/container-platform The Container Platform Team team/containers
Projects
None yet
Milestone
7.64.0
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.
2 participants
@sblumenthal @gabedos