Skip to content

[EBPF] gpu: add validation task against live metrics#46885

Merged
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 9 commits intomainfrom
guillermo.julian/live-validation-script
Mar 26, 2026
Merged

[EBPF] gpu: add validation task against live metrics#46885
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 9 commits intomainfrom
guillermo.julian/live-validation-script

Conversation

@gjulianm
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@gjulianm gjulianm commented Feb 24, 2026

What does this PR do?

Adds task gpu.validate-metrics to check the specification against metrics sent to Datadog.

Most of the code is placed in tasks/libs/gpu for separation, additionally it guards against importing packages that are not present by default in dda installation.

Motivation

Help validation by ensuring the behavior of the agent in production matches what is in the specification.

Describe how you validated your changes

Tested manually, only python code for auxiliary tasks, no agent code changes.

Additional Notes

Some of the metric specifications are updated to match what's being actually emitted.

There were also some changes in pyproject.toml to ensure typing is enforced in the new code, and to avoid a vulture error with pydantic schemas.

@gjulianm gjulianm self-assigned this Feb 24, 2026
@gjulianm gjulianm force-pushed the guillermo.julian/gpum-spec branch 2 times, most recently from a4a7658 to de53f30 Compare March 2, 2026 14:02
@gjulianm gjulianm force-pushed the guillermo.julian/live-validation-script branch from 211f465 to a0f30b9 Compare March 2, 2026 15:50
Base automatically changed from guillermo.julian/gpum-spec to main March 3, 2026 14:17
@gjulianm gjulianm force-pushed the guillermo.julian/live-validation-script branch from a6d7873 to e829bd6 Compare March 20, 2026 16:47
@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot added the internal Identify a non-fork PR label Mar 20, 2026
@gjulianm gjulianm added changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation labels Mar 20, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the long review PR is complex, plan time to review it label Mar 20, 2026
@agent-platform-auto-pr
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

agent-platform-auto-pr Bot commented Mar 20, 2026

Files inventory check summary

File checks results against ancestor 7d01f6de:

Results for datadog-agent_7.79.0~devel.git.187.1cde0e8.pipeline.104495341-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

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

agent-platform-auto-pr Bot commented Mar 20, 2026

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor 7d01f6d
📊 Static Quality Gates Dashboard
🔗 SQG Job

30 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)
Quality gate Current Size
agent_deb_amd64 752.537 MiB
agent_deb_amd64_fips 709.559 MiB
agent_heroku_amd64 313.293 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64 752.521 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64_fips 709.542 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64 730.963 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64_fips 690.994 MiB
agent_suse_amd64 752.521 MiB
agent_suse_amd64_fips 709.542 MiB
agent_suse_arm64 730.963 MiB
agent_suse_arm64_fips 690.994 MiB
docker_agent_amd64 812.839 MiB
docker_agent_arm64 816.052 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_amd64 1003.755 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_arm64 995.746 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_amd64 203.938 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_arm64 218.420 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64 7.142 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64 6.689 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_amd64 39.238 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_arm64 37.445 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_amd64 29.881 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_arm64 28.030 MiB
dogstatsd_rpm_amd64 29.881 MiB
dogstatsd_suse_amd64 29.881 MiB
iot_agent_deb_amd64 43.270 MiB
iot_agent_deb_arm64 40.320 MiB
iot_agent_deb_armhf 41.064 MiB
iot_agent_rpm_amd64 43.270 MiB
iot_agent_suse_amd64 43.270 MiB
On-wire sizes (compressed)
Quality gate Change Size (prev → curr → max)
agent_deb_amd64 -10.4 KiB (0.01% reduction) 174.711 → 174.700 → 178.360
agent_deb_amd64_fips -20.69 KiB (0.01% reduction) 165.311 → 165.291 → 172.790
agent_heroku_amd64 neutral 75.002 MiB → 79.970
agent_rpm_amd64 -6.66 KiB (0.00% reduction) 177.540 → 177.533 → 181.830
agent_rpm_amd64_fips neutral 167.596 MiB → 173.370
agent_rpm_arm64 -39.6 KiB (0.02% reduction) 159.523 → 159.485 → 163.060
agent_rpm_arm64_fips -14.45 KiB (0.01% reduction) 151.334 → 151.320 → 156.170
agent_suse_amd64 -6.66 KiB (0.00% reduction) 177.540 → 177.533 → 181.830
agent_suse_amd64_fips neutral 167.596 MiB → 173.370
agent_suse_arm64 -39.6 KiB (0.02% reduction) 159.523 → 159.485 → 163.060
agent_suse_arm64_fips -14.45 KiB (0.01% reduction) 151.334 → 151.320 → 156.170
docker_agent_amd64 neutral 268.093 MiB → 272.480
docker_agent_arm64 neutral 255.304 MiB → 261.060
docker_agent_jmx_amd64 +3.02 KiB (0.00% increase) 336.747 → 336.750 → 341.100
docker_agent_jmx_arm64 neutral 319.932 MiB → 325.620
docker_cluster_agent_amd64 neutral 71.367 MiB → 72.920
docker_cluster_agent_arm64 neutral 67.015 MiB → 68.220
docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64 neutral 2.999 MiB → 3.330
docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64 neutral 2.729 MiB → 3.090
docker_dogstatsd_amd64 neutral 15.173 MiB → 15.820
docker_dogstatsd_arm64 neutral 14.487 MiB → 14.830
dogstatsd_deb_amd64 neutral 7.893 MiB → 8.790
dogstatsd_deb_arm64 neutral 6.777 MiB → 7.710
dogstatsd_rpm_amd64 neutral 7.903 MiB → 8.800
dogstatsd_suse_amd64 neutral 7.903 MiB → 8.800
iot_agent_deb_amd64 neutral 11.398 MiB → 12.040
iot_agent_deb_arm64 neutral 9.702 MiB → 10.450
iot_agent_deb_armhf neutral 9.939 MiB → 10.620
iot_agent_rpm_amd64 neutral 11.417 MiB → 12.060
iot_agent_suse_amd64 neutral 11.417 MiB → 12.060

@cit-pr-commenter-54b7da
Copy link
Copy Markdown

cit-pr-commenter-54b7da Bot commented Mar 20, 2026

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: f830af84-0d8b-4c4f-a0f7-083e5e576c7e

Baseline: 7d01f6d
Comparison: 1cde0e8
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 +5.56 [+2.50, +8.62] 1 Logs

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
docker_containers_cpu % cpu utilization +5.56 [+2.50, +8.62] 1 Logs
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization +0.84 [-0.81, +2.48] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
ddot_metrics memory utilization +0.29 [+0.12, +0.47] 1 Logs
ddot_metrics_sum_delta memory utilization +0.26 [+0.09, +0.43] 1 Logs
docker_containers_memory memory utilization +0.15 [+0.07, +0.23] 1 Logs
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory utilization +0.08 [-0.15, +0.32] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization +0.08 [+0.04, +0.11] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders memory utilization +0.04 [-0.02, +0.10] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput +0.02 [-0.40, +0.45] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput +0.01 [-0.19, +0.21] 1 Logs
tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.12, +0.12] 1 Logs
ddot_logs memory utilization -0.01 [-0.07, +0.05] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput -0.02 [-0.41, +0.38] 1 Logs
uds_dogstatsd_to_api_v3 ingress throughput -0.02 [-0.22, +0.18] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput -0.06 [-0.13, +0.02] 1 Logs
ddot_metrics_sum_cumulativetodelta_exporter memory utilization -0.07 [-0.29, +0.16] 1 Logs
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput -0.08 [-0.60, +0.44] 1 Logs
file_tree memory utilization -0.11 [-0.17, -0.05] 1 Logs
ddot_metrics_sum_cumulative memory utilization -0.11 [-0.26, +0.03] 1 Logs
tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -0.14 [-0.29, +0.00] 1 Logs
otlp_ingest_metrics memory utilization -0.18 [-0.34, -0.01] 1 Logs
otlp_ingest_logs memory utilization -0.32 [-0.42, -0.22] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle memory utilization -0.32 [-0.37, -0.27] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard

Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed observed_value links
docker_containers_cpu simple_check_run 10/10 672 ≥ 26
docker_containers_memory memory_usage 10/10 271.17MiB ≤ 370MiB
docker_containers_memory simple_check_run 10/10 696 ≥ 26
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.19GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.23GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.19GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.21GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
quality_gate_idle intake_connections 10/10 3 = 3 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory_usage 10/10 173.14MiB ≤ 175MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features intake_connections 10/10 3 = 3 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory_usage 10/10 500.08MiB ≤ 550MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs intake_connections 10/10 4 ≤ 6 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs memory_usage 10/10 207.16MiB ≤ 220MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs cpu_usage 10/10 365.85 ≤ 2000 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs intake_connections 10/10 4 ≤ 6 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory_usage 10/10 414.12MiB ≤ 475MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B 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_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 missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, 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 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 memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@gjulianm gjulianm force-pushed the guillermo.julian/live-validation-script branch from e743a9b to f6675d6 Compare March 25, 2026 11:52
@gjulianm gjulianm marked this pull request as ready for review March 25, 2026 11:52
@gjulianm gjulianm requested review from a team as code owners March 25, 2026 11:52
Copy link
Copy Markdown

@chatgpt-codex-connector chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: f6675d685f

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

  • Open a pull request for review
  • Mark a draft as ready
  • Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

Comment thread tasks/gpu.py
Comment thread tasks/libs/gpu/api.py
Comment on lines +36 to +37
if (virtualization_mode or "").lower() == "vgpu":
return "vgpu"
Copy link
Copy Markdown

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

P1 Badge Classify host_vgpu as vgpu device mode

normalize_device_mode only maps virtualization_mode == "vgpu" to vGPU, so values like host_vgpu are treated as physical. The NVML collector can emit host_vgpu for vGPU devices, so this misclassifies live configs and validates them against the physical support matrix, producing false failures and hiding real vGPU gaps.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

host_vgpu is not supported yet and we are not clear on the type of metrics that will appear in that case. For now, not treating it as a separate case.

Comment thread tasks/libs/gpu/types.py
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/merge

@gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351
Copy link
Copy Markdown

gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351 Bot commented Mar 26, 2026

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-03-26 15:56:39 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge


2026-03-26 15:56:44 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: pull request added to the queue

The expected merge time in main is approximately 2h (p90).


2026-03-26 16:39:35 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: This merge request was merged

@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot merged commit b63ccef into main Mar 26, 2026
236 checks passed
@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot deleted the guillermo.julian/live-validation-script branch March 26, 2026 16:39
@github-actions github-actions Bot added this to the 7.79.0 milestone Mar 26, 2026
@KevinFairise2 KevinFairise2 restored the guillermo.julian/live-validation-script branch March 26, 2026 17:14
datadog-prod-us1-3 Bot added a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 26, 2026
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Mar 27, 2026
### What does this PR do?

Change files we consider, to also consider fixtures file that are not Go files, and count them as a modification to the package they belong to

### Motivation

Should force the test to be executed in the package, for PRs like: #46885

### Describe how you validated your changes

### Additional Notes


Co-authored-by: kevin.fairise <kevin.fairise@datadoghq.com>
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 1, 2026
### What does this PR do?

Adds task `gpu.validate-metrics` to check the specification against metrics sent to Datadog.

Most of the code is placed in `tasks/libs/gpu` for separation, additionally it guards against importing packages that are not present by default in `dda` installation.

This is a re-application of #46885, that got reverted because unit tests regarding the YAML spec did not run on the PR and failed on `main`.

### Motivation

Help validation by ensuring the behavior of the agent in production matches what is in the specification.

### Describe how you validated your changes

Tested manually, only python code for auxiliary tasks. Validated that unit tests regarding the spec run successfully.

### Additional Notes

Some of the metric specifications are updated to match what's being actually emitted.

There were also some changes in pyproject.toml to ensure typing is enforced in the new code, and to avoid a `vulture` error with `pydantic` schemas. 

Co-authored-by: guillermo.julian <guillermo.julian@datadoghq.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed internal Identify a non-fork PR long review PR is complex, plan time to review it qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation team/agent-devx team/ebpf-platform

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants