Skip to content

fix(cloudfoundry): avoid nil panic on failed DCA connection - #54848

Draft
NouemanKHAL wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
noueman/fix-cf-vm-dca-nil-panic
Draft

fix(cloudfoundry): avoid nil panic on failed DCA connection#54848
NouemanKHAL wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
noueman/fix-cf-vm-dca-nil-panic

Conversation

@NouemanKHAL

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

TL;DR

Fixes a nil pointer dereference in the cloudfoundry-vm workloadmeta collector that crashes the node Agent on Cloud Foundry when the connection to the Cluster Agent fails. Regressed in 7.81.

Motivation

Agents on Cloud Foundry running 7.81+ panic repeatedly with:

panic: runtime error: invalid memory address or nil pointer dereference
clusteragent.(*DCAClient).buildURL(...) clusteragent.go:271
clusteragent.(*DCAClient).GetCFAppsMetadataForNode(0x0, ...)
cloudfoundry/vm.(*collector).Pull(...) cf_vm.go:111

Root cause: getDCAClient() assigns clusteragent.GetClusterAgentClient() (return type (*DCAClient, error)) directly into the c.dcaClient interface field before checking the error. On a failed connection the returned nil *DCAClient is boxed into the interface, producing a non-nil "typed nil". The next Pull passes the c.dcaClient != nil cache check and calls GetCFAppsMetadataForNode on the nil receiver, panicking.

This became reachable in 7.81 when #50814 changed GetClusterAgentClient's return type from DCAClientInterface to *DCAClient. Before that, the error path returned a true nil interface, so the field was never poisoned. 7.80.4 is unaffected.

What this does

  • getDCAClient: assign the result to a local *DCAClient and only store it into c.dcaClient on success.
  • Pull: call the local dcaClient returned by getDCAClient() instead of the field c.dcaClient.

Validation / Testing

  • Added TestPullDCAConnectionFailureDoesNotPanic: two Pulls with dcaEnabled=true and no reachable Cluster Agent; asserts the second does not panic.
  • Verified the test is a real regression guard: reverting the fix makes it panic at cf_vm.go:111 (the exact crash line); with the fix all package tests pass.

🤖 Generated with Claude Code

getDCAClient stored the result of GetClusterAgentClient (which returns
(*DCAClient, error)) directly into the c.dcaClient interface field before
checking the error. On a failed connection the returned nil *DCAClient was
boxed into the interface, producing a non-nil "typed nil". The next Pull
passed the `c.dcaClient != nil` cache check and panicked when calling
GetCFAppsMetadataForNode on the nil receiver.

Assign to a local *DCAClient and only store it on success. Also call the
local client returned by getDCAClient in Pull instead of the field.

This regressed in 7.81 when GetClusterAgentClient's return type changed from
DCAClientInterface to *DCAClient (#50814); previously the error path returned
a true nil interface and was harmless.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.8 <noreply@anthropic.com>
@github-actions

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

@codex review

@dd-octo-sts dd-octo-sts Bot added internal Identify a non-fork PR team/agent-integrations labels Aug 13, 2026
@github-actions github-actions Bot added the short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly label Aug 13, 2026
@chatgpt-codex-connector

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. What shall we delve into next?

Reviewed commit: 5836295c73

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".

@NouemanKHAL NouemanKHAL added the qa/rc-required Only for a PR that requires validation on the Release Candidate label Aug 17, 2026
@datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2

datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2 Bot commented Aug 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
Patch Coverage: 66.67%
Overall Coverage: 39.37% (-13.00%)

This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 887c557 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Aug 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Files inventory check summary

File checks results against ancestor 5fcb9f95:

Results for datadog-agent_7.84.0~devel.git.224.887c557.pipeline.131269539-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

Results for datadog-iot-agent_7.84.0~devel.git.224.887c557.pipeline.131269539-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

@dd-octo-sts

dd-octo-sts Bot commented Aug 17, 2026

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor 5fcb9f9
📊 Static Quality Gates Dashboard
🔗 SQG Job

32 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)
Quality gate Current Size
agent_deb_amd64 760.218 MiB
agent_deb_amd64_fips 713.079 MiB
agent_heroku_amd64 312.557 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64 760.201 MiB
agent_rpm_amd64_fips 713.062 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64 735.966 MiB
agent_rpm_arm64_fips 692.153 MiB
agent_suse_amd64 760.201 MiB
agent_suse_amd64_fips 713.062 MiB
agent_suse_arm64 735.966 MiB
agent_suse_arm64_fips 692.153 MiB
docker_agent_amd64 818.833 MiB
docker_agent_arm64 819.642 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_amd64 1009.731 MiB
docker_agent_jmx_arm64 999.192 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_amd64 210.475 MiB
docker_cluster_agent_arm64 223.456 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64 7.439 MiB
docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64 6.877 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_amd64 39.482 MiB
docker_dogstatsd_arm64 37.560 MiB
docker_host_profiler_amd64 305.814 MiB
docker_host_profiler_arm64 317.125 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_amd64 30.224 MiB
dogstatsd_deb_arm64 28.247 MiB
dogstatsd_rpm_amd64 30.224 MiB
dogstatsd_suse_amd64 30.224 MiB
iot_agent_deb_amd64 46.475 MiB
iot_agent_deb_arm64 43.127 MiB
iot_agent_deb_armhf 43.910 MiB
iot_agent_rpm_amd64 46.476 MiB
iot_agent_suse_amd64 46.475 MiB

@cit-pr-commenter-54b7da

Copy link
Copy Markdown

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Job ID: c501a06b-783f-4c14-b7be-b02bda8cf9a5

Baseline: fec92d8
Comparison: 887c557
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 +1.82 [+1.56, +2.07] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs % cpu utilization +1.02 [+0.12, +1.91] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle memory utilization +0.32 [+0.21, +0.42] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features memory utilization +0.28 [+0.24, +0.33] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load memory utilization +0.22 [+0.08, +0.37] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_private_action_runner memory utilization +0.12 [-0.00, +0.23] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load memory utilization -0.09 [-0.16, -0.01] 1 Logs bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle memory utilization -0.25 [-0.37, -0.14] 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 10/10 172.23MiB ≤ 178MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle total_bytes_received 10/10 739.80KiB ≤ 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 10/10 519.89MiB ≤ 538MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_idle_all_features total_bytes_received 10/10 1.13MiB ≤ 1.25MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs intake_connections 10/10 17 ≤ 40 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs memory_usage 10/10 204.88MiB ≤ 229MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs missed_bytes 10/10 0B = 0B bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_logs total_bytes_received 10/10 263.80MiB ≤ 292MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs cpu_usage 10/10 365.68 ≤ 2000 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs intake_connections 10/10 20 ≤ 40 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_metrics_logs memory_usage 10/10 404.08MiB ≤ 439MiB 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 72.81MiB ≤ 76MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle cpu_usage 10/10 26.68 ≤ 100 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_idle memory_usage 10/10 330.99MiB ≤ 335MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load cpu_usage 10/10 59.62 ≤ 200 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load memory_usage 10/10 302.32MiB ≤ 314MiB bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load cpu_usage 10/10 20.86 ≤ 100 bounds checks dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load memory_usage 10/10 312.02MiB ≤ 343MiB 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_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_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 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 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_idle, 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_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_private_action_runner, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
  • quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 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 memory_usage: 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 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_security_mean_fs_load, 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.

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

Labels

internal Identify a non-fork PR qa/rc-required Only for a PR that requires validation on the Release Candidate short review PR is simple enough to be reviewed quickly team/agent-integrations

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant