tetragon: handle test events sequentially #4291
Open
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
kevsecurity
added
the
release-note/misc
✅ Deploy Preview for tetragon ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
The test infrastructure that monitors the ring buffers and handles events during tests does not mirror how tetragon does this in production. When monitoring events for real, we have an event cache channel that the ring buffer monitors write to, and the event handler reads from. This means that events are handled sequentially. In the test infrastructure, the ring buffer monitors handle the events directly, resulting in two events able to be handle concurrently, which causes problems. This commit introduces an event cache to the test infrastructure and uses that to handle events sequentially, avoiding the problem. Signed-off-by: Kevin Sheldrake <[email protected]>
kevsecurity
force-pushed
the
pr/kevsecurity/handle-test-events-sequentially
branch
from
e7ab737 to
68c069e
Compare
Contributor
Author
|
ARM failure is a known issue. |
FedeDP
approved these changes
Nov 10, 2025
kkourt
reviewed
Nov 12, 2025
| errChan <- fmt.Errorf("error loop event function returned: %w", err) | ||
| break | ||
| } | ||
| if complChecker.Done() || ctxPerfRing.Err() != nil { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What happens if there is a ctxPerfRing error? Do we propagate it to the test somehow?
The benefit of having t *testing.T is that we can just fail the test, but we do not seem to be doing that.
Contributor
Author
There was a problem hiding this comment.
We use ctxPerfRing only to indicate that we are done. I don't think we need to propagate any errors. What errors did you have in mind?
| errChan <- fmt.Errorf("error loop event function returned: %w", err) | ||
| break | ||
| } | ||
| if complChecker.Done() || ctxBPFRing.Err() != nil { |
Contributor
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Similarly for this error here.
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
The test infrastructure that monitors the ring buffers and handles events during tests does not mirror how tetragon does this in production. When monitoring events for real, we have an event cache channel that the ring buffer monitors write to, and the event handler reads from. This means that events are handled sequentially.
In the test infrastructure, the ring buffer monitors handle the events directly, resulting in two events able to be handle concurrently, which causes problems. This commit introduces an event cache to the test infrastructure and uses that to handle events sequentially, avoiding the problem.