Skip to content

ebpf.plugin: rework memory #19844

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

Merged
merged 28 commits into from
Mar 28, 2025
Merged

Conversation

thiagoftsm
Copy link
Contributor

@thiagoftsm thiagoftsm commented Mar 13, 2025

Summary

This is the last PR before move integration from ebpf.plugin to apps.plugin and cgroup.plugin.

It address some SIGABRT and SIGSEGV identified with code allocation. On all scenarios where it was tested, I could not observe more the issues after the development finished.

Test Plan
Additional Information

This PR was tested on:

Distribution Hardware or VM Installation Kernel
Slackware Linux Hardware Compilation from scratch 6.12.19
Arch Linux Valgrant VM Compilation from scratch 6.13.7-arch1-1
Ubuntu 24.04 Vagrant VM Compilation from scratch 6.8.0-53-generic
Debian 12 Vagrant VM Compilation from scratch 6.1.128-1
Ubuntu 22.04 Vagrant VM Compilation from scratch 5.15.0-91-generic
Ubuntu 20.04 Vagrant VM Compilation from scratch 5.4.0-169-generic
Oracle 9 Vagrant VM Compilation from scratch 5.14.0-503.33.1
Ubuntu 18.04 Vagrant VM Static 4.15.0-213-generic
For users: How does this change affect me? Describe the PR affects users: - Which area of Netdata is affected by the change? ebpf.plugin - Can they see the change or is it an under the hood? If they can see it, where? Plugin is going to need less memory. - How is the user impacted by the change? A more stable plugin. - What are there any benefits of the change? Plugin using less memory and without some ancient issues.

@thiagoftsm thiagoftsm marked this pull request as draft March 13, 2025 03:28
@github-actions github-actions bot added area/collectors Everything related to data collection collectors/ebpf labels Mar 13, 2025
@thiagoftsm thiagoftsm requested a review from stelfrag March 13, 2025 04:12
@netdata-community-bot
Copy link

This pull request has been mentioned on Netdata Community Forums. There might be relevant details there:

https://community.netdata.cloud/t/mem-cachestat-ratio-doesnt-work-after-upgrading-netdata/7345/3

@thiagoftsm thiagoftsm force-pushed the ebpf_rework_mem branch 2 times, most recently from a5a213e to 7884d46 Compare March 20, 2025 02:00
@github-actions github-actions bot added the area/metadata Integrations metadata label Mar 21, 2025
@thiagoftsm thiagoftsm force-pushed the ebpf_rework_mem branch 2 times, most recently from 46b67a9 to 82fb8fc Compare March 22, 2025 22:31
@thiagoftsm
Copy link
Contributor Author

I rebased the PR to verify no changes were introduced after the latest commits. This PR has been running successfully for four days without any issues. After completing one final test with the most recent commits, it will be marked as ready for review.

@thiagoftsm thiagoftsm marked this pull request as ready for review March 27, 2025 01:19
@thiagoftsm thiagoftsm merged commit 12e830a into netdata:master Mar 28, 2025
102 of 103 checks passed
@thiagoftsm thiagoftsm deleted the ebpf_rework_mem branch March 28, 2025 13:56
stelfrag pushed a commit to stelfrag/netdata that referenced this pull request Mar 28, 2025
@stelfrag stelfrag mentioned this pull request Mar 28, 2025
Ferroin pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 2, 2025
(cherry picked from commit 12e830a)
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
area/collectors Everything related to data collection area/metadata Integrations metadata collectors/ebpf
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants