Skip to content

test(e2e/windows): ignore TiWorker.exe crash dumps#51140

Merged
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
branden.clark/ignore-tiworker-crash
May 22, 2026
Merged

test(e2e/windows): ignore TiWorker.exe crash dumps#51140
gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d[bot] merged 1 commit into
mainfrom
branden.clark/ignore-tiworker-crash

Conversation

@clarkb7
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@clarkb7 clarkb7 commented May 20, 2026 •
edited by atlassian Bot
Loading

What does this PR do?

Adds TiWorker.exe to DefaultIgnoredCrashDumpImages so Windows Modules Installer Worker crashes are still collected as artifacts but do not fail Windows E2E tests.

Motivation

Ref: WINA-2712. TiWorker crashes were failing TestAgentMSIInstallsDotnetLibrary. Analysis of the dump from job 1698945354 with cdb:

  • Faulting instruction: MPCLIENT!tlgEnableCallback in an already-unloaded MPCLIENT.DLL (Microsoft Defender).
  • Stack is entirely ntdll!Etwp* notification thread frames.
  • !analyze -v root cause: "An ETW client DLL was unloaded but failed to unregister the ETW provider GUID prior to unload. This is a problem with the provider."

This is a Microsoft Defender ETW unload race, unrelated to the Datadog agent.

@clarkb7
test(e2e/windows): ignore TiWorker.exe crash dumps
09e54c9 
TiWorker.exe (Windows Modules Installer Worker) crashes have been observed
in dotnet library installer E2E tests. Analysis of the dump shows the AV
occurs in MPCLIENT!tlgEnableCallback after Microsoft Defender's MPCLIENT.DLL
was unloaded without unregistering its ETW provider — a Microsoft issue
unrelated to the Datadog agent.

Ref: WINA-2712
@clarkb7 clarkb7 added changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation team/windows-products labels May 20, 2026
@github-actions
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

github-actions Bot commented May 20, 2026

@codex review

@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot added the internal Identify a non-fork PR label May 20, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly label May 20, 2026
@chatgpt-codex-connector
Copy link
Copy Markdown

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot commented May 20, 2026

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. Bravo.

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically 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 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

@datadog-prod-us1-6
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

datadog-prod-us1-6 Bot commented May 20, 2026 •
edited by datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2 Bot
Loading

Pipelines

✨ Fix all issues with BitsAI

⚠️ Warnings

🚦 2 Pipeline jobs failed

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

🔄 Retry job. This looks flaky and may succeed on retry. Failed to ping oracle instance: ORA-12514: TNS:listener does not currently know of service requested in connect descriptor.

DataDog/datadog-agent | unit_tests_notify   View in Datadog   GitLab

🛟 This job is unlikely to succeed on retry. Please review your pipeline configuration. Command 'ls junit-tests_*.tgz' failed: No such file or directory.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 09e54c9 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

@dd-octo-sts
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

dd-octo-sts Bot commented May 20, 2026

Files inventory check summary

File checks results against ancestor b661dc54:

Results for datadog-agent_7.81.0~devel.git.19.09e54c9.pipeline.114380653-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

@clarkb7 clarkb7 marked this pull request as ready for review May 21, 2026 13:16
@clarkb7 clarkb7 requested a review from a team as a code owner May 21, 2026 13:16
@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot merged commit 4226d69 into main May 22, 2026
322 checks passed
@gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d gh-worker-dd-mergequeue-cf854d Bot deleted the branden.clark/ignore-tiworker-crash branch May 22, 2026 22:46
@github-actions github-actions Bot added this to the 7.81.0 milestone May 22, 2026
@cit-pr-commenter-54b7da
Copy link
Copy Markdown

cit-pr-commenter-54b7da Bot commented May 22, 2026

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: debfac69-a78b-4ac6-846d-77330731d50e

Baseline: bcafc93
Comparison: 4226d69
Diff

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Experiments ignored for regressions

Regressions in experiments with settings containing erratic: true are ignored.

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
✅ docker_containers_cpu % cpu utilization -5.18 [-8.06, -2.30] 1 Logs

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf experiment goal Δ mean % Δ mean % CI trials links
➖ uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders memory utilization +0.38 [+0.33, +0.43] 1 Logs
➖ otlp_ingest_logs memory utilization +0.33 [+0.21, +0.44] 1 Logs
➖ ddot_metrics_sum_delta memory utilization +0.30 [+0.11, +0.49] 1 Logs
➖ ddot_metrics memory utilization +0.27 [+0.08, +0.47] 1 Logs
➖ file_tree memory utilization +0.25 [+0.20, +0.31] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency egress throughput +0.05 [-0.40, +0.50] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency egress throughput +0.05 [-0.07, +0.18] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency egress throughput +0.01 [-0.39, +0.41] 1 Logs
➖ tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude ingress throughput +0.00 [-0.09, +0.10] 1 Logs
➖ uds_dogstatsd_to_api ingress throughput -0.01 [-0.22, +0.19] 1 Logs
➖ uds_dogstatsd_to_api_v3 ingress throughput -0.03 [-0.24, +0.18] 1 Logs
➖ ddot_metrics_sum_cumulativetodelta_exporter memory utilization -0.03 [-0.27, +0.20] 1 Logs
➖ file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency egress throughput -0.04 [-0.56, +0.48] 1 Logs
➖ ddot_metrics_sum_cumulative memory utilization -0.11 [-0.27, +0.06] 1 Logs
➖ quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization -0.12 [-1.14, +0.89] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖ quality_gate_idle memory utilization -0.14 [-0.19, -0.10] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖ otlp_ingest_metrics memory utilization -0.32 [-0.47, -0.16] 1 Logs
➖ docker_containers_memory memory utilization -0.33 [-0.43, -0.23] 1 Logs
➖ ddot_logs memory utilization -0.38 [-0.44, -0.33] 1 Logs
➖ quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization -0.59 [-0.65, -0.54] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖ quality_gate_metrics_logs memory utilization -0.78 [-1.02, -0.54] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖ tcp_syslog_to_blackhole ingress throughput -1.80 [-1.99, -1.61] 1 Logs
✅ docker_containers_cpu % cpu utilization -5.18 [-8.06, -2.30] 1 Logs

Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed

perf experiment bounds_check_name replicates_passed observed_value links
✅ docker_containers_cpu simple_check_run 10/10 699 ≥ 26
✅ docker_containers_memory memory_usage 10/10 250.06MiB ≤ 370MiB
✅ docker_containers_memory simple_check_run 10/10 686 ≥ 26
✅ file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.16GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅ file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
✅ file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.20GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅ file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
✅ file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.17GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅ file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
✅ file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency memory_usage 10/10 0.19GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅ file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B
✅ quality_gate_idle intake_connections 10/10 3 ≤ 4 bounds checks dashboard
✅ quality_gate_idle memory_usage 10/10 143.65MiB ≤ 147MiB bounds checks dashboard
✅ quality_gate_idle total_bytes_received 10/10 740.15KiB ≤ 819.20KiB bounds checks dashboard
✅ quality_gate_idle_all_features intake_connections 10/10 2 ≤ 4 bounds checks dashboard
✅ quality_gate_idle_all_features memory_usage 10/10 426.03MiB ≤ 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 10/10 174.18MiB ≤ 195MiB bounds checks dashboard
✅ quality_gate_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
✅ quality_gate_logs total_bytes_received 10/10 264.35MiB ≤ 292MiB bounds checks dashboard
✅ quality_gate_metrics_logs cpu_usage 10/10 346.40 ≤ 2000 bounds checks dashboard
✅ quality_gate_metrics_logs intake_connections 10/10 3 ≤ 6 bounds checks dashboard
✅ quality_gate_metrics_logs memory_usage 10/10 378.31MiB ≤ 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".

CI Pass/Fail Decision

✅ Passed. All Quality Gates 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_metrics_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 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 cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check total_bytes_received: 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_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 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_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Reviewers

@mrafi97 mrafi97 mrafi97 approved these changes

Assignees

No one assigned

Labels

changelog/no-changelog No changelog entry needed internal Identify a non-fork PR qa/no-code-change No code change in Agent code requiring validation short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly team/windows-products

Projects

None yet

Milestone

7.81.0

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants

@clarkb7 @mrafi97