Skip to content

[ABLD-8] Make the agent "payload version" string available to bazel rules#52033

Open
aiuto wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
aiuto/payload_version
Open

[ABLD-8] Make the agent "payload version" string available to bazel rules#52033
aiuto wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
aiuto/payload_version

Conversation

@aiuto

@aiuto aiuto commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

ABLD-8 Make the agent "payload version" string available to bazel rules.

What does this do

  • Provides the paylod version string as a constant we can use in Bazel rules. Specifially: tasks/agent_payload_version.bzl contains AGENT_PAYLOAD_VERSION = "v5.0.198"
  • This is derived from go.mod, using the code from tasks/libs/common/utils.py
  • There is a consistancy check to make sure that we update the constant if it changes in go.mod

Motivation

Go binaries that we deliver have the version embedded in them, usually with a link time flag. E.g. -X github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/version.AgentPayloadVersion=v5.0.198. This allows us to pick up the value from a BUILD file or wrapper rule to build the correct link string.

Alternatives

  1. Instead of keeping a checked in version of tasks/agent_payload_version.bzl, we could generate the constant as a repository rule.
  • That would be more complex
  • Would require slightly less work when the version updates.
  • => If the updates become a nuisance we can switch to that.
  1. Instead of using a link flag, we could generate the strings to a source file, and use embed_srcs to include them.
  • This avoids the limitation of the Go linker that we can not generate the constant dynamically and read it from a file at link time. Reading dyamically generated source files is fine.
  • This is a change from how we build it now. We should defer choosing that until we are on the 3rd or 4th go_binary

In either case, the alternates would be almoast identical to this PR. The difference would be in the format of the .bzl file emitted by tasks/libs/common/get_payload_version.py

Next steps:

  • splice this into the upcoming dd_agent_go_binary rule.
  • Use the new rule for //cmd/installer:installer.

…ules.

**What does this do**

- Provides the paylod version string as a constant we can use in Bazel rules.
  Specifially: tasks/agent_payload_version.bzl contains `AGENT_PAYLOAD_VERSION = "v5.0.198"`
- This is derived from go.mod, using the code from tasks/libs/common/utils.py
- There is a consistancy check to make sure that we update the constant if it changes in go.mod

**Motivation**

Go binaries that we deliver have the version embedded in them, usually with a link time flag. E.g. `-X github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/version.AgentPayloadVersion=v5.0.198`.  This allows us to pick up the value from a BUILD file or wrapper rule to build the correct link string.

**Alternatives

1) Instead of keeping a checked in version of tasks/agent_payload_version.bzl, we could generate the constant as a repository rule.
- That would be more complex
- Would require slightly less work when the version updates.
- => If the updates become a nuisance we can switch to that.

2) Instead of using a link flag, we could generate the strings to a source file, and use `embed_srcs` to include them.
- This avoids the limitation of the Go linker that we can not generate the constant dynamically and read it from a file at link time. Reading dyamically generated source files is fine.
- This is a change from how we build it now. We should defer choosing that until we are on the 3rd or 4th go_binary

In either case, the alternates would be almoast identical to this PR. The difference would be in the format of the .bzl file emitted by tasks/libs/common/get_payload_version.py

Next steps:
- splice this into the upcoming `dd_agent_go_binary` rule.
- Use the new rule for //cmd/installer:installer.
@aiuto aiuto requested review from a team as code owners June 9, 2026 16:53
@aiuto aiuto added changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation labels Jun 9, 2026
@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot added the internal Identify a non-fork PR label Jun 9, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the medium review PR review might take time label Jun 9, 2026
@datadog-datadog-prod-us1

datadog-datadog-prod-us1 Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Pipelines

Fix all issues with BitsAI

⚠️ Warnings

🚦 2 Pipeline jobs failed

DataDog/datadog-agent | oracle: [21.3.0-xe]   View in Datadog   GitLab

DataDog/datadog-agent | unit_tests_notify   View in Datadog   GitLab

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 0aa178f | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Files inventory check summary

File checks results against ancestor 2e9ccff8:

Results for datadog-agent_7.81.0~devel.git.639.0aa178f.pipeline.117829209-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor 2e9ccff
📊 Static Quality Gates Dashboard
🔗 SQG Job

33 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)
Quality gate Current Size
agent_deb_amd64 751.651 MiB
agent_deb_amd64_fips 707.422 MiB
agent_heroku_amd64 310.320 MiB
agent_msi 617.196 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64 751.635 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64_fips 707.406 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64 727.038 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64_fips 686.557 MiB
agent_suse_amd64 751.635 MiB
agent_suse_amd64_fips 707.406 MiB
agent_suse_arm64 727.038 MiB
agent_suse_arm64_fips 686.557 MiB
docker_agent_amd64 811.080 MiB
docker_agent_arm64 811.512 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_amd64 1002.021 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_arm64 991.105 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_amd64 209.753 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_arm64 222.847 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64 7.447 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64 6.877 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_amd64 39.841 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_arm64 37.946 MiB
docker_host_profiler_amd64 304.525 MiB
docker_host_profiler_arm64 315.638 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_amd64 30.502 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_arm64 28.499 MiB
dogstatsd_rpm_amd64 30.502 MiB
dogstatsd_suse_amd64 30.502 MiB
iot_agent_deb_amd64 45.762 MiB
iot_agent_deb_arm64 42.472 MiB
iot_agent_deb_armhf 43.270 MiB
iot_agent_rpm_amd64 45.762 MiB
iot_agent_suse_amd64 45.761 MiB

@cit-pr-commenter-54b7da

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 5f378651-1ebd-40b1-afe8-7fa7c5d9e0ba

Baseline: 2e9ccff
Comparison: 0aa178f
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory utilization +0.36 [+0.12, +0.61] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization +0.35 [-0.71, +1.40] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory utilization +0.30 [+0.24, +0.35] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization -0.43 [-0.47, -0.39] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard

Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed observed_value links
quality_gate_idle intake_connections 10/10 3 ≤ 4 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory_usage 10/10 145.47MiB ≤ 147MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle total_bytes_received 10/10 733.96KiB ≤ 819.20KiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features intake_connections 10/10 3 ≤ 4 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory_usage 10/10 478.00MiB ≤ 495MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features total_bytes_received 10/10 1.12MiB ≤ 1.25MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs intake_connections 10/10 4 ≤ 6 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs memory_usage 10/10 178.79MiB ≤ 195MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs total_bytes_received 10/10 264.00MiB ≤ 292MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs cpu_usage 10/10 335.80 ≤ 2000 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs intake_connections 10/10 4 ≤ 6 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory_usage 10/10 392.48MiB ≤ 430MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs total_bytes_received 10/10 0.94GiB ≤ 1.04GiB 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 (ddprof)

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 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_logs baseline 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_logs comparison 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs baseline 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs comparison 10 Oom killed Debug Dashboard

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 total_bytes_received: 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 cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, 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 total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 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 total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle_all_features, 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_idle, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

@aiuto

aiuto commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

/merge -@ 2am

@gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351

gh-worker-devflow-routing-ef8351 Bot commented Jun 9, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown

View all feedbacks in Devflow UI.

2026-06-09 18:51:11 UTC ℹ️ Start processing command /merge -@ 2am


2026-06-09 18:51:15 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: merge request scheduled for Wed, 10 Jun 2026 02:00:00 UTC

Pull Request scheduled to be added to the queue on Wed, 10 Jun 2026 02:00:00 UTC


2026-06-10 02:00:09 UTC ℹ️ MergeQueue: waiting for PR to be ready

This merge request is not mergeable according to GitHub. Common reasons include pending required checks, missing approvals, or merge conflicts — but it could also be blocked by other repository rules or settings.
It will be added to the queue as soon as checks pass and/or get approvals. View in MergeQueue UI.
Note: if you pushed new commits since the last approval, you may need additional approval.
You can remove it from the waiting list with /remove command.


2026-06-10 06:04:10 UTC ⚠️ MergeQueue: This merge request was unqueued

devflow unqueued this merge request: It did not become mergeable within the expected time

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 medium review PR review might take time qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation team/agent-build team/agent-devx

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant