Skip to content

fix(static-quality-gates): really skip per-PR size thresholds on main - #55592

Open
rdesgroppes wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
regis.desgroppes/sqg-per-pr-thresholds-on-main
Open

fix(static-quality-gates): really skip per-PR size thresholds on main#55592
rdesgroppes wants to merge 1 commit into
mainfrom
regis.desgroppes/sqg-per-pr-thresholds-on-main

Conversation

@rdesgroppes

@rdesgroppes rdesgroppes commented Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

What does this PR do?

Derive is_on_main_branch from the branch name, the way tasks/package.py already does, instead of comparing the ancestor to HEAD: get_ancestor replaces the ancestor with the parent commit on main, so that comparison was always False and main pipelines were evaluated as pull requests.

The flag now also skips the PR lookup, and get_ancestor no longer computes a flag it throws away.

Motivation

https://gitlab.ddbuild.io/DataDog/datadog-agent/-/jobs/1993405414 failed on main for a test-only fix, 7 of 33 gates reporting growth nobody introduced:

Gate static_quality_gate_agent_deb_amd64 failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 90.02 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_agent_msi failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 75.83 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_agent_rpm_arm64 failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 81.56 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_agent_suse_arm64 failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 81.56 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_agent_suse_arm64_fips failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 76.9 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_docker_cluster_agent_amd64 failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 36.81 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_docker_dogstatsd_amd64 failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 7.65 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB

The baseline was garbage (#55595 is meant to fix it): the parent commit was built by 2 concurrent push pipelines (https://gitlab.ddbuild.io/DataDog/datadog-agent/-/pipelines/133869316 / https://gitlab.ddbuild.io/DataDog/datadog-agent/-/pipelines/133869408), and reading their duplicate gauges mid-submission made the averaging ancestor query return exactly half the real size.

Deltas measured against a parent commit are not a pipeline's own work, so the per-PR check has no business running on main.

The same PR lookup also made the job comment on #55434, an unrelated pull request whose head branch happens to be main:

Updated comment on PR #55434 - fix(data-race): lock ntmConfig.GetNode for concurrent access (#55389)

Describe how you validated your changes

dda inv invoke-unit-tests.run --directory=tasks/unit_tests/static_quality_gates runs 194 tests green, and the added test_per_pr_threshold_skipped_on_main is the only failure once is_on_main_branch is forced back to False.

Additional Notes

Release-branch pipelines still evaluate the per-PR thresholds, since get_default_branch() returns main there, but they cannot fail on it because the Exit is intentionally skipped for release branches.

### What does this PR do?
Derive `is_on_main_branch` from the branch name, the way
`tasks/package.py` already does, instead of comparing the ancestor to
`HEAD`: `get_ancestor` replaces the ancestor with the parent commit on
`main`, so that comparison was **always `False`** and `main` pipelines
were evaluated as pull requests.

The flag now also skips the PR lookup, and `get_ancestor` no longer
computes a flag it throws away.

### Motivation
https://gitlab.ddbuild.io/DataDog/datadog-agent/-/jobs/1993405414 failed
on `main` for a test-only fix, 7 of 33 gates reporting growth nobody
introduced:
```
Gate static_quality_gate_agent_deb_amd64 failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 90.02 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_agent_msi failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 75.83 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_agent_rpm_arm64 failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 81.56 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_agent_suse_arm64 failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 81.56 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_agent_suse_arm64_fips failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 76.9 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_docker_cluster_agent_amd64 failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 36.81 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
Gate static_quality_gate_docker_dogstatsd_amd64 failed ❌ with the following message:
On-wire size increase of 7.65 MiB exceeds the per-PR wire threshold of 5.0 MiB
```
The baseline was garbage: the parent commit was built by 2 concurrent
push pipelines
(https://gitlab.ddbuild.io/DataDog/datadog-agent/-/pipelines/133869316
and
https://gitlab.ddbuild.io/DataDog/datadog-agent/-/pipelines/133869408),
and reading their duplicate gauges mid-submission made the averaging
ancestor query return exactly half the real size.

Deltas measured against a parent commit are not a pipeline's own work,
so the per-PR check has no business running on `main`.

The same PR lookup also made the job comment on #55434, an **unrelated**
pull request whose head branch happens to be `main`.

### Describe how you validated your changes
`dda inv invoke-unit-tests.run
--directory=tasks/unit_tests/static_quality_gates` runs 194 tests green,
and the added `test_per_pr_threshold_skipped_on_main` is the only
failure once `is_on_main_branch` is forced back to `False`.

### Additional Notes
Release-branch pipelines still evaluate the per-PR thresholds, since
`get_default_branch()` returns `main` there, but they cannot fail on it
because the `Exit` is intentionally skipped for release branches.
@rdesgroppes rdesgroppes added the changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed label Aug 28, 2026
@rdesgroppes
rdesgroppes requested review from a team as code owners August 28, 2026 12:17
@rdesgroppes rdesgroppes added the qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation label Aug 28, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the medium review PR review might take time label Aug 28, 2026

@github-actions github-actions Bot left a comment

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

AI review by Codex (OpenAI) - workflow run

patch is correct — branch-name detection now correctly skips per-PR thresholds and branch PR lookup on main, with focused integration coverage.

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Files inventory check summary

File checks results against ancestor ad97d80a:

Results for datadog-agent_7.84.0~devel.git.569.0dd02cd.pipeline.133904752-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

Results for datadog-iot-agent_7.84.0~devel.git.569.0dd02cd.pipeline.133904752-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Aug 28, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor ad97d80
📊 Static Quality Gates Dashboard
🔗 SQG Job

32 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)
Quality gate Current Size
agent_deb_amd64 761.393 MiB
agent_deb_amd64_fips 713.920 MiB
agent_heroku_amd64 312.966 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64 761.376 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64_fips 713.904 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64 737.301 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64_fips 693.135 MiB
agent_suse_amd64 761.376 MiB
agent_suse_amd64_fips 713.904 MiB
agent_suse_arm64 737.301 MiB
agent_suse_arm64_fips 693.135 MiB
docker_agent_amd64 820.409 MiB
docker_agent_arm64 821.369 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_amd64 1011.321 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_arm64 1001.062 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_amd64 211.254 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_arm64 224.398 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64 7.439 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64 6.877 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_amd64 39.545 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_arm64 37.623 MiB
docker_host_profiler_amd64 306.862 MiB
docker_host_profiler_arm64 318.167 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_amd64 30.290 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_arm64 28.302 MiB
dogstatsd_rpm_amd64 30.290 MiB
dogstatsd_suse_amd64 30.290 MiB
iot_agent_deb_amd64 46.564 MiB
iot_agent_deb_arm64 43.200 MiB
iot_agent_deb_armhf 44.011 MiB
iot_agent_rpm_amd64 46.564 MiB
iot_agent_suse_amd64 46.563 MiB

@cit-pr-commenter-54b7da

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Job ID: 84f9137f-b568-4f68-b9eb-95eff108d54d

Baseline: ad97d80
Comparison: 0dd02cd
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_security_no_fs_load memory utilization +0.25 [+0.17, +0.34] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
dsd_uds_10mb_3k_timestamped_contexts_memory memory utilization +0.22 [+0.01, +0.43] 1 Logs
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load memory utilization +0.07 [+0.03, +0.11] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle memory utilization -0.07 [-0.12, -0.02] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
dsd_uds_10mb_3k_timestamped_contexts_cpu % cpu utilization -0.08 [-0.32, +0.16] 1 Logs
quality_gate_idle memory utilization -0.12 [-0.16, -0.08] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization -0.29 [-0.33, -0.25] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory utilization -0.35 [-0.58, -0.12] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_private_action_runner memory utilization -0.74 [-0.85, -0.62] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization -2.30 [-3.15, -1.45] 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 4 = 4 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory_usage 10/10 173.71MiB ≤ 179MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle total_bytes_received 10/10 752.23KiB ≤ 819.20KiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features intake_connections 10/10 4 = 4 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory_usage 10/10 523.80MiB ≤ 537MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features total_bytes_received 10/10 1.14MiB ≤ 1.25MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs intake_connections 10/10 19 ≤ 40 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs memory_usage 10/10 210.64MiB ≤ 220MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs total_bytes_received 10/10 263.08MiB ≤ 292MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs cpu_usage 10/10 369.45 ≤ 2000 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs intake_connections 10/10 20 ≤ 40 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory_usage 10/10 418.37MiB ≤ 455MiB 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
quality_gate_private_action_runner memory_usage 10/10 72.32MiB ≤ 75MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle cpu_usage 10/10 28.77 ≤ 100 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle memory_usage 10/10 322.96MiB ≤ 355MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load cpu_usage 10/10 60.03 ≤ 200 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load memory_usage 10/10 302.67MiB ≤ 335MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load cpu_usage 10/10 22.51 ≤ 100 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load memory_usage 10/10 310.89MiB ≤ 345MiB 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_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.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 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 missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_private_action_runner, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_idle, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_no_fs_load, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_security_no_fs_load, bounds check cpu_usage: 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_idle_all_features, bounds check total_bytes_received: 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 memory_usage: 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 total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

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.

3 participants