[EBPF] gpu: add validation task against live metrics#46885
[EBPF] gpu: add validation task against live metrics#46885gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 9 commits intomainfrom
Conversation
a4a7658 to
de53f30
Compare
211f465 to
a0f30b9
Compare
a6d7873 to
e829bd6
Compare
Files inventory check summaryFile checks results against ancestor 7d01f6de: Results for datadog-agent_7.79.0~devel.git.187.1cde0e8.pipeline.104495341-1_amd64.deb:No change detected |
Static quality checks✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates 30 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)
On-wire sizes (compressed)
|
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: 7d01f6d Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| 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:
-
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_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.
e743a9b to
f6675d6
Compare
There was a problem hiding this comment.
💡 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".
| if (virtualization_mode or "").lower() == "vgpu": | ||
| return "vgpu" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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 👍 / 👎.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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.
|
/merge |
|
View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.
The expected merge time in
|
This reverts commit b63ccef.
### 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>
### 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>
What does this PR do?
Adds task
gpu.validate-metricsto check the specification against metrics sent to Datadog.Most of the code is placed in
tasks/libs/gpufor separation, additionally it guards against importing packages that are not present by default inddainstallation.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
vultureerror withpydanticschemas.