Skip to content

[AGENTRUN-558] Rust checks code - Add ability to run Rust-based checks through shared libraries#42351

Closed
Enzu83 wants to merge 19 commits intomainfrom
maxime.chambre/shared-library-check-rustcheck
Closed

[AGENTRUN-558] Rust checks code - Add ability to run Rust-based checks through shared libraries#42351
Enzu83 wants to merge 19 commits intomainfrom
maxime.chambre/shared-library-check-rustcheck

Conversation

@Enzu83
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@Enzu83 Enzu83 commented Oct 27, 2025

NOTE: This PR contains the draft for http_check in Rust. It's working well for few use cases.

What does this PR do?

This PR adds code to write and compile Rust-based checks, with a simple Rust check as an example.

Motivation

Describe how you validated your changes

Additional Notes

@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr Bot commented Oct 27, 2025

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor c7d9740
📊 Static Quality Gates Dashboard

Successful checks

Info

Quality gate Change Size (prev → curr → max)
agent_deb_amd64 N/A N/A → 705.336 → 708.410
agent_deb_amd64_fips N/A N/A → 700.621 → 704.000
agent_heroku_amd64 N/A N/A → 326.967 → 329.530
agent_msi N/A N/A → 571.509 → 982.080
agent_rpm_amd64 N/A N/A → 705.322 → 708.380
agent_rpm_amd64_fips N/A N/A → 700.608 → 703.990
agent_rpm_arm64 N/A N/A → 686.901 → 693.520
agent_rpm_arm64_fips N/A N/A → 682.988 → 688.480
agent_suse_amd64 N/A N/A → 705.322 → 708.380
agent_suse_amd64_fips N/A N/A → 700.608 → 703.990
agent_suse_arm64 N/A N/A → 686.901 → 693.520
agent_suse_arm64_fips N/A N/A → 682.988 → 688.480
docker_agent_amd64 N/A N/A → 767.552 → 770.720
docker_agent_arm64 N/A N/A → 773.686 → 780.200
docker_agent_jmx_amd64 N/A N/A → 958.463 → 961.600
docker_agent_jmx_arm64 N/A N/A → 953.380 → 959.800
docker_cluster_agent_amd64 N/A N/A → 180.766 → 181.080
docker_cluster_agent_arm64 N/A N/A → 196.619 → 198.490
docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64 N/A N/A → 7.135 → 7.180
docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64 N/A N/A → 6.689 → 6.920
docker_dogstatsd_amd64 N/A N/A → 38.812 → 39.380
docker_dogstatsd_arm64 N/A N/A → 37.128 → 37.940
dogstatsd_deb_amd64 N/A N/A → 30.031 → 30.610
dogstatsd_deb_arm64 N/A N/A → 28.176 → 29.110
dogstatsd_rpm_amd64 N/A N/A → 30.031 → 30.610
dogstatsd_suse_amd64 N/A N/A → 30.031 → 30.610
iot_agent_deb_amd64 N/A N/A → 43.045 → 43.290
iot_agent_deb_arm64 N/A N/A → 40.158 → 40.920
iot_agent_deb_armhf N/A N/A → 40.744 → 41.030
iot_agent_rpm_amd64 N/A N/A → 43.046 → 43.290
iot_agent_suse_amd64 N/A N/A → 43.046 → 43.290
On-wire sizes (compressed)
Quality gate Change Size (prev → curr → max)
agent_deb_amd64 N/A N/A → 173.329 → 174.490
agent_deb_amd64_fips N/A N/A → 172.267 → 173.750
agent_heroku_amd64 N/A N/A → 87.118 → 88.450
agent_msi N/A N/A → 142.930 → 143.020
agent_rpm_amd64 N/A N/A → 176.094 → 177.660
agent_rpm_amd64_fips N/A N/A → 174.975 → 176.600
agent_rpm_arm64 N/A N/A → 159.349 → 161.260
agent_rpm_arm64_fips N/A N/A → 158.781 → 160.550
agent_suse_amd64 N/A N/A → 176.094 → 177.660
agent_suse_amd64_fips N/A N/A → 174.975 → 176.600
agent_suse_arm64 N/A N/A → 159.349 → 161.260
agent_suse_arm64_fips N/A N/A → 158.781 → 160.550
docker_agent_amd64 N/A N/A → 261.087 → 262.450
docker_agent_arm64 N/A N/A → 250.102 → 252.630
docker_agent_jmx_amd64 N/A N/A → 329.750 → 331.080
docker_agent_jmx_arm64 N/A N/A → 314.728 → 317.270
docker_cluster_agent_amd64 N/A N/A → 63.864 → 64.490
docker_cluster_agent_arm64 N/A N/A → 60.142 → 61.170
docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64 N/A N/A → 2.994 → 3.330
docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64 N/A N/A → 2.726 → 3.090
docker_dogstatsd_amd64 N/A N/A → 15.028 → 15.820
docker_dogstatsd_arm64 N/A N/A → 14.351 → 14.830
dogstatsd_deb_amd64 N/A N/A → 7.945 → 8.790
dogstatsd_deb_arm64 N/A N/A → 6.822 → 7.710
dogstatsd_rpm_amd64 N/A N/A → 7.956 → 8.800
dogstatsd_suse_amd64 N/A N/A → 7.956 → 8.800
iot_agent_deb_amd64 N/A N/A → 11.274 → 12.040
iot_agent_deb_arm64 N/A N/A → 9.637 → 10.450
iot_agent_deb_armhf N/A N/A → 9.836 → 10.620
iot_agent_rpm_amd64 N/A N/A → 11.294 → 12.060
iot_agent_suse_amd64 N/A N/A → 11.294 → 12.060

@cit-pr-commenter
Copy link
Copy Markdown

cit-pr-commenter Bot commented Oct 27, 2025

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 6324e5c9-c7b0-420c-954e-9aca4f0ecfaf

Baseline: c7d9740
Comparison: be1c6eb
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Experiments ignored for regressions

Regressions in experiments with settings containing erratic: true are ignored.

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
docker_containers_cpu % cpu utilization +1.22 [-1.74, +4.18] 1 Logs

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization +1.46 [+0.01, +2.91] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
docker_containers_cpu % cpu utilization +1.22 [-1.74, +4.18] 1 Logs
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory utilization +0.64 [+0.43, +0.86] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
ddot_metrics memory utilization +0.50 [+0.29, +0.72] 1 Logs
otlp_ingest_logs memory utilization +0.34 [+0.25, +0.43] 1 Logs
otlp_ingest_metrics memory utilization +0.31 [+0.16, +0.46] 1 Logs
file_tree memory utilization +0.19 [+0.13, +0.25] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput +0.01 [-0.03, +0.05] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput +0.01 [-0.48, +0.49] 1 Logs
ddot_metrics_sum_delta memory utilization +0.01 [-0.20, +0.21] 1 Logs
ddot_metrics_sum_cumulativetodelta_exporter memory utilization +0.00 [-0.23, +0.24] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput +0.00 [-0.39, +0.39] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.09, +0.09] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput -0.00 [-0.13, +0.12] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput -0.01 [-0.41, +0.40] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_v3 ingress throughput -0.02 [-0.14, +0.10] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization -0.04 [-0.08, -0.00] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders memory utilization -0.13 [-0.19, -0.07] 1 Logs
ddot_logs memory utilization -0.25 [-0.31, -0.18] 1 Logs
ddot_metrics_sum_cumulative memory utilization -0.26 [-0.43, -0.10] 1 Logs
docker_containers_memory memory utilization -0.32 [-0.39, -0.25] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle memory utilization -0.35 [-0.39, -0.30] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -1.13 [-1.19, -1.06] 1 Logs

Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed links
docker_containers_cpu simple_check_run 10/10
docker_containers_memory memory_usage 10/10
docker_containers_memory simple_check_run 10/10
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency lost_bytes 10/10
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency memory_usage 10/10
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency lost_bytes 10/10
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency 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_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
quality_gate_metrics_logs cpu_usage 10/10 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs intake_connections 10/10 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs lost_bytes 10/10 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_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".

Replicate Execution Details

We run multiple replicates for each experiment/variant. However, we allow replicates to be automatically retried if there are any failures, up to 8 times, at which point the replicate is marked dead and we are unable to run analysis for the entire experiment. We call each of these attempts at running replicates a replicate execution. This section lists all replicate executions that failed due to the target crashing or being oom killed.

Note: In the below tables we bucket failures by experiment, variant, and failure type. For each of these buckets we list out the replicate indexes that failed with an annotation signifying how many times said replicate failed with the given failure mode. In the below example the baseline variant of the experiment named experiment_with_failures had two replicates that failed by oom kills. Replicate 0, which failed 8 executions, and replicate 1 which failed 6 executions, all with the same failure mode.

Experiment Variant Replicates Failure Logs Debug Dashboard
experiment_with_failures baseline 0 (x8) 1 (x6) Oom killed Debug Dashboard

The debug dashboard links will take you to a debugging dashboard specifically designed to investigate replicate execution failures.

❌ Retried Profiling Replicate Execution Failures (target internal profiling)

Note: Profiling replicas may still be executing. See the debug dashboard for up to date status.

Experiment Variant Replicates Failure Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features baseline 11 (x4) Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features comparison 11 (x3) Oom killed Debug Dashboard

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 lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate 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_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_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.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@Enzu83 Enzu83 changed the title [AGENTRUN-558] Rust-based checks source code [AGENTRUN-558] Rust checks code - Add ability to run Rust-based checks through shared libraries Oct 27, 2025
dd-mergequeue Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 12, 2025
…braries (#39676)

<!--
* Contributors are encouraged to read our [CONTRIBUTING](/CONTRIBUTING.md) documentation.
* Both Contributor and Reviewer Checklists are available at https://datadoghq.dev/datadog-agent/guidelines/contributing/#pull-requests.
* The pull request:
  * Should only fix one issue or add one feature at a time.
  * Must update the test suite for the relevant functionality.
  * Should pass all status checks before being reviewed or merged.
* Commit titles should be prefixed with general area of pull request's change.
* Please fill the below sections if possible with relevant information or links.
-->
### What does this PR do?

⚠️ This new feature is experimental ⚠️

This PR introduces a new way of running checks, through shared libraries. They are Rust-based and loaded at runtime by a new checks loader. You can read the documentation [here](https://datadoghq.atlassian.net/wiki/spaces/ARUN/pages/5479301643/Running+shared+library+checks+in+the+Agent).

The Rust-based checks API is minimal for now, only the submit functions are available. The API can be expanded quite easily by adding new fields to the C structure `aggregator_t`.

Also, this PR moves the Go submit functions (like `SubmitMetric`) from the collector Python package to a new package (named `aggregator`). That way both Python and shared library checks can use callbacks from this package. These Go submit functions were in the Python package just because Python checks were the only ones using them, but their scope are larger than just Python checks

### Motivation

Provide a new way of writing checks to improve Agent performances and to rely a bit less on the Python runtime.

### Describe how you validated your changes
<!--
Validate your changes before merge, ensuring that:
* Your PR is tested by static / unit / integrations / e2e tests
* Your PR description details which e2e tests cover your changes, if any
* The PR description contains details of how you validated your changes. If you validated changes manually and not through automated tests, add context on why automated tests did not fit your changes validation.

If you want additional validation by a second person, you can ask reviewers to do it. Describe how to set up an environment for manual tests in the PR description. Manual validation is expected to happen on every commit before merge.

Any manual validation step should then map to an automated test. Manual validation should not substitute automation, minus exceptions not supported by test tooling yet.
-->

Few unit tests to test the new checks loader and the shared library checks implementation (for the Go part).
An e2e test for Linux and Windows to load and run a simple shared library check that submits one metric.

### Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

### Additional Notes
<!--
* Anything else we should know when reviewing?
* Include benchmarking information here whenever possible.
* Include info about alternatives that were considered and why the proposed
  version was chosen.
-->

The Rust part of this feature (where shared libraries are compiled from) is on this PR:
- #42351

Co-authored-by: pgimalac <pierre.gimalac@datadoghq.com>
Co-authored-by: maxime.chambre <maxime.chambre@datadoghq.com>
@Enzu83 Enzu83 force-pushed the maxime.chambre/shared-library-check-rustcheck branch from 08f686b to 7f1f1c1 Compare January 14, 2026 14:06
@Enzu83 Enzu83 force-pushed the maxime.chambre/shared-library-check-rustcheck branch from 001168a to 8e6885e Compare January 14, 2026 19:28
@Enzu83 Enzu83 force-pushed the maxime.chambre/shared-library-check-rustcheck branch from 8e6885e to 90af960 Compare January 15, 2026 12:20
@Enzu83 Enzu83 closed this Feb 9, 2026
@Enzu83 Enzu83 reopened this Feb 9, 2026
@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot added the internal Identify a non-fork PR label Feb 9, 2026
@dd-octo-sts
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Feb 24, 2026

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!

@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot added the stale label Feb 24, 2026
@dd-octo-sts
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Mar 27, 2026

This pull request was automatically closed because it has been stale for 15 days with no activity.

If this pull request is still relevant, please reopen it or create a new pull request with updated information.

Thanks!

@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot closed this Mar 27, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

auto-closed internal Identify a non-fork PR long review PR is complex, plan time to review it stale team/agent-runtimes

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant