-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 1.2k
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] add additional fentry check for weak duplicated symbols #31632
Conversation
Test changes on VMUse this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM: inv create-vm --pipeline-id=50168439 --os-family=ubuntu Note: This applies to commit da4e315 |
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 98b799c Optimization Goals: ❌ Significant changes detected
|
perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
❌ | basic_py_check | % cpu utilization | +6.20 | [+2.25, +10.14] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | +3.72 | [+0.72, +6.72] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | otel_to_otel_logs | ingress throughput | +0.76 | [+0.04, +1.48] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.68 | [+0.62, +0.74] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +0.17 | [+0.02, +0.32] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +0.16 | [-0.57, +0.89] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.01 | [-0.70, +0.72] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.09, +0.07] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.81, +0.77] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.80, +0.75] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.15 | [-0.79, +0.49] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | -0.19 | [-0.66, +0.28] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -0.21 | [-0.31, -0.10] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | -0.24 | [-0.29, -0.20] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.35 | [-1.15, +0.44] | 1 | Logs |
➖ | pycheck_lots_of_tags | % cpu utilization | -1.04 | [-4.53, +2.45] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed
perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
---|---|---|---|---|
❌ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_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_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 | 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:
-
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_idle, 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 memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
/merge |
Devflow running:
|
What does this PR do?
This PR adds an additional check for duplicated symbols, matching the cilium/ebpf issue cilium/ebpf#894.
Basically the issue is that if the BTF blob from the kernel contains multiple entries matching the name of the hooked function, it's not possible to know which one to hook and the underlying lib returns an error. There is no clear way around this for now, so this PR adds a check against this to disable fentry if we believe we might be hit by that.
One especially important example of this is some syscalls on x64 that have one real definition and one weak one resulting in duplicated types in the BTF.
Motivation
Describe how to test/QA your changes
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
Additional Notes