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
[windows][wkint-492] Update ETW with new functions; add ability to get ETW stats #25494
Conversation
intermediate checking. Have standalone commit to allow changing number of ETW buffers add ability to get etw stats clean up cherry-pick
Test changes on VMUse this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM: inv create-vm --pipeline-id=34207644 --os-family=ubuntu |
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsRun ID: cd0583c0-8c76-424d-87a1-d6812c0be38e Performance changes are noted in the perf column of each table:
No significant changes in experiment optimization goalsConfidence level: 90.00% There were no significant changes in experiment optimization goals at this confidence level and effect size tolerance.
|
perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI |
---|---|---|---|---|
✅ | file_to_blackhole | % cpu utilization | -7.96 | [-9.16, -6.77] |
Fine details of change detection per experiment
perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI |
---|---|---|---|---|
➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +6.18 | [-15.72, +28.07] |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +1.73 | [-1.10, +4.57] |
➖ | idle | memory utilization | +0.18 | [+0.13, +0.22] |
➖ | trace_agent_json | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] |
➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.20, +0.20] |
➖ | trace_agent_msgpack | ingress throughput | -0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] |
➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | -0.01 | [-0.05, +0.02] |
➖ | otel_to_otel_logs | ingress throughput | -0.15 | [-0.55, +0.25] |
➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | -0.24 | [-0.34, -0.13] |
➖ | basic_py_check | % cpu utilization | -0.51 | [-2.92, +1.89] |
➖ | pycheck_1000_100byte_tags | % cpu utilization | -4.46 | [-9.13, +0.21] |
✅ | file_to_blackhole | % cpu utilization | -7.96 | [-9.16, -6.77] |
Explanation
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".
… initialize an entirely new structure to get statistics
pkg/security/probe/probe_windows.go
Outdated
@@ -159,7 +159,9 @@ func (p *WindowsProbe) initEtwFIM() error { | |||
if err != nil { | |||
return err | |||
} | |||
p.fimSession, err = etwcomp.NewSession(etwSessionName) | |||
p.fimSession, err = etwcomp.NewSession(etwSessionName, func(cfg *etw.SessionConfiguration) { |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
it seems from the implementation of NewSession that we could pass nil instead of an empty body function here, but probably just a taste question
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
true.
It's a derivative of another branch where I had several, unrelated changes for doing the perf testing.
My orig implementation couldn't handle a nil
. And, my orig implementation actually filled in something here. But in order to split out into smaller PRs, this PR is only to add the ability to set that config.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like @paulcacheux suggestion as well, or perhaps providing a default function that does nothing / apply default values:
func DefaultConfig(cfg *etw.SessionConfiguration) {
//
}
...
etwcomp.NewSession(etwSessionName, etw.DefaultConfig)
It seems to me like it would be a simple change to make.
/merge |
🚂 MergeQueue Pull request added to the queue. There are 2 builds ahead! (estimated merge in less than 1h) Use |
/merge -c |
This merge request was unqueued If you need support, contact us on Slack #devflow! |
This reverts commit f30c328.
/merge |
🚂 MergeQueue This merge request is not mergeable yet, because of pending checks/missing approvals. It will be added to the queue as soon as checks pass and/or get approvals. Use |
🚂 MergeQueue Pull request added to the queue. This build is going to start soon! (estimated merge in less than 26m) Use |
intermediate checking. Have standalone commit to allow changing number of ETW buffers
add ability to get etw stats
clean up cherry-pick
What does this PR do?
PR adds two new features to the ETW component for future use (at least) in CWS
Describe how to test/QA your changes
This PR is adding the functionality, but there's currently no consumer. Test would be to ensure no loss of functionality in existing consumer(s) (apm) (i.e. regression test).