Run system-probe config fixups after BuildSchema

[rahulkaukuntla]

What does this PR do?

Renames fixupInitSystemProbe to postProcessSystemProbe and moves the call from fixupInitConfig into LoadDatadog, right after useHostEtc.

Motivation

postProcessSystemProbe reads and writes system-probe config keys (apt_config_dir, yum_repos_dir, zypper_repos_dir) to rewrite them under HOST_ETC. It was being called too early on two counts:

• Before BuildSchema() marks the config ready, so the readiness guard in the getters kicks in and GetSource/GetString silently no-op. Agents logged attempt to read key before config is constructed: system_probe_config.apt_config_dir (and the yum/zypper equivalents) on every start, and the rewrite never applied since GetSource returns SourceUnknown instead of SourceDefault while the config isn't ready.
• Before useHostEtc runs, so even once that readiness issue is fixed, auto-detected HOST_ETC (as opposed to one set in the env ahead of time) still wouldn't be picked up.

This was introduced in #53983, which changed the function from a no-op into a real implementation without accounting for either ordering constraint.

Describe how you validated your changes

Added a regression test (TestPostProcessSystemProbeRunsAfterConfigIsReady) that runs the real InitConfigObjects() + LoadDatadog() flow with HOST_ETC set and asserts the three keys get rewritten. Confirmed it fails against the old code (reproducing the exact error messages seen in the field) and passes with the fix. Also ran the full pkg/config/setup test suite and linter, no regressions.

Additional Notes

Serverless builds don't call this at all, since they have no system-probe config.

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 6c273e78f0

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Your team has set up Codex to 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 👍.

Codex can also answer questions or update the PR. Try commenting "@codex address that feedback".

[datadog-datadog-prod-us1-2]

🎯 Code Coverage (details)
• Patch Coverage: 100.00%
• Overall Coverage: 48.15% (-4.16%)

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 9abe4f6 | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!}

[dd-octo-sts]

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor d1520bc
📊 Static Quality Gates Dashboard
🔗 SQG Job
SOME SIZE DELTAS ARE N/A (ANCESTOR METRICS NOT YET AVAILABLE). RETRY JOB

Successful checks

Info

	Quality gate	Change	Size (prev → curr → max)
✅	agent_deb_amd64	N/A	N/A → 759.538 → 764.430
✅	agent_deb_amd64_fips	N/A	N/A → 712.892 → 715.680
✅	agent_heroku_amd64	N/A	N/A → 312.272 → 318.990
✅	agent_msi	N/A	N/A → 643.216 → 660.900
✅	agent_rpm_amd64	N/A	N/A → 759.522 → 764.400
✅	agent_rpm_amd64_fips	N/A	N/A → 712.876 → 715.680
✅	agent_rpm_arm64	N/A	N/A → 735.499 → 736.490
✅	agent_rpm_arm64_fips	N/A	N/A → 692.112 → 693.640
✅	agent_suse_amd64	N/A	N/A → 759.522 → 764.400
✅	agent_suse_amd64_fips	N/A	N/A → 712.876 → 715.680
✅	agent_suse_arm64	N/A	N/A → 735.499 → 736.490
✅	agent_suse_arm64_fips	N/A	N/A → 692.112 → 693.640
✅	docker_agent_amd64	N/A	N/A → 818.162 → 819.970
✅	docker_agent_arm64	N/A	N/A → 819.175 → 820.690
✅	docker_agent_jmx_amd64	N/A	N/A → 1009.059 → 1010.730
✅	docker_agent_jmx_arm64	N/A	N/A → 998.725 → 1000.370
✅	docker_cluster_agent_amd64	N/A	N/A → 210.346 → 211.300
✅	docker_cluster_agent_arm64	N/A	N/A → 223.393 → 223.810
✅	docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64	N/A	N/A → 7.439 → 7.480
✅	docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64	N/A	N/A → 6.877 → 7.110
✅	docker_dogstatsd_amd64	N/A	N/A → 39.474 → 39.960
✅	docker_dogstatsd_arm64	N/A	N/A → 37.560 → 38.270
✅	docker_host_profiler_amd64	N/A	N/A → 305.804 → 317.690
✅	docker_host_profiler_arm64	N/A	N/A → 317.122 → 328.970
✅	dogstatsd_deb_amd64	N/A	N/A → 30.216 → 31.200
✅	dogstatsd_deb_arm64	N/A	N/A → 28.239 → 29.580
✅	dogstatsd_rpm_amd64	N/A	N/A → 30.216 → 31.200
✅	dogstatsd_suse_amd64	N/A	N/A → 30.216 → 31.200
✅	iot_agent_deb_amd64	N/A	N/A → 46.420 → 46.440
✅	iot_agent_deb_arm64	N/A	N/A → 43.095 → 43.770
✅	iot_agent_deb_armhf	N/A	N/A → 43.875 → 44.020
✅	iot_agent_rpm_amd64	N/A	N/A → 46.420 → 46.440
✅	iot_agent_suse_amd64	N/A	N/A → 46.419 → 46.440

[cit-pr-commenter-54b7da]

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 5998d436-ad56-4531-ad0a-f3dab1e968e0

Baseline: ca45c2b
Comparison: d019929
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_idle	memory utilization	+0.15	[+0.04, +0.25]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	quality_gate_metrics_logs	memory utilization	+0.08	[-0.16, +0.33]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	quality_gate_security_no_fs_load	memory utilization	+0.01	[-0.14, +0.15]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	quality_gate_idle	memory utilization	-0.04	[-0.16, +0.07]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load	memory utilization	-0.07	[-0.14, +0.01]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	quality_gate_private_action_runner	memory utilization	-0.07	[-0.19, +0.04]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory utilization	-0.33	[-0.37, -0.28]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	quality_gate_logs	% cpu utilization	-1.08	[-1.92, -0.23]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard

Bounds Checks: ❌ Failed

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	0/10	173.10MiB > 154MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle	total_bytes_received	10/10	731.88KiB ≤ 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	511.01MiB ≤ 512MiB	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	0/10	204.55MiB > 195MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	total_bytes_received	10/10	264.17MiB ≤ 292MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	cpu_usage	10/10	353.88 ≤ 2000	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	intake_connections	10/10	18 ≤ 40	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	memory_usage	10/10	403.36MiB ≤ 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
✅	quality_gate_private_action_runner	memory_usage	10/10	71.66MiB ≤ 75MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_security_idle	cpu_usage	10/10	24.77 ≤ 100	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_security_idle	memory_usage	10/10	326.62MiB ≤ 330MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load	cpu_usage	10/10	61.34 ≤ 200	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_security_mean_fs_load	memory_usage	10/10	300.76MiB ≤ 310MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_security_no_fs_load	cpu_usage	10/10	21.27 ≤ 100	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_security_no_fs_load	memory_usage	10/10	312.05MiB ≤ 320MiB	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	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
quality_gate_security_idle	baseline	10	Crashed (exit code: 134)	Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_security_no_fs_load	comparison	10	Crashed (exit code: 134)	Debug Dashboard

CI Pass/Fail Decision

❌ Failed. Some Quality Gates were violated.

• 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_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 0/10 replicas passed. Failed 10 which is > 0. Gate FAILED.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_security_no_fs_load, 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_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_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_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, bounds check memory_usage: 0/10 replicas passed. Failed 10 which is > 0. Gate FAILED.
• 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_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 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 intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_private_action_runner, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

[dustmop]

Thanks for fixing, LGTM

[temporal-github-worker-1]

Backport evaluation: View Slack thread