NETOBSERV-1676: make ebpf sampling global and visible to all hooks

[msherif1234]

Description

make ebpf sampling global to all ebpf hooks

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

• Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist.
• Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
• Does this PR require product documentation?
  • If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
• Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
  • If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
• Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
  • If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
• QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
  • Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
  • Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
  • No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

[openshift-ci-robot]

@msherif1234: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1676 which is a valid jira issue.

Warning: The referenced jira issue has an invalid target version for the target branch this PR targets: expected the bug to target the "4.17.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

Description

make ebpf sampling global to all ebpf hooks

Dependencies

n/a

Checklist

If you are not familiar with our processes or don't know what to answer in the list below, let us know in a comment: the maintainers will take care of that.

• Will this change affect NetObserv / Network Observability operator? If not, you can ignore the rest of this checklist.
• Is this PR backed with a JIRA ticket? If so, make sure it is written as a title prefix (in general, PRs affecting the NetObserv/Network Observability product should be backed with a JIRA ticket - especially if they bring user facing changes).
• Does this PR require product documentation?
• If so, make sure the JIRA epic is labelled with "documentation" and provides a description relevant for doc writers, such as use cases or scenarios. Any required step to activate or configure the feature should be documented there, such as new CRD knobs.
• Does this PR require a product release notes entry?
• If so, fill in "Release Note Text" in the JIRA.
• Is there anything else the QE team should know before testing? E.g: configuration changes, environment setup, etc.
• If so, make sure it is described in the JIRA ticket.
• QE requirements (check 1 from the list):
• Standard QE validation, with pre-merge tests unless stated otherwise.
• Regression tests only (e.g. refactoring with no user-facing change).
• No QE (e.g. trivial change with high reviewer's confidence, or per agreement with the QE team).

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the openshift-eng/jira-lifecycle-plugin repository.

[codecov]

Codecov Report

All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests ✅

Please upload report for BASE (main@4bb1e30). Learn more about missing BASE report.

Additional details and impacted files

@@           Coverage Diff           @@
##             main     #346   +/-   ##
=======================================
  Coverage        ?   33.30%           
=======================================
  Files           ?       48           
  Lines           ?     3492           
  Branches        ?        0           
=======================================
  Hits            ?     1163           
  Misses          ?     2232           
  Partials        ?       97           

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	33.30% <ø> (?)

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

[github-actions]

New image:
quay.io/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent:4967224

It will expire after two weeks.

To deploy this build, run from the operator repo, assuming the operator is running:

USER=netobserv VERSION=4967224 make set-agent-image

[jotak]

As discussed, if we need to choose between honouring sampling config or not, I'm for doing it. But users may complain about the opposite, ie. we don't report all drops anymore. If that happens then we should make that a configurable choice.
/lgtm

[msherif1234]

As discussed, if we need to choose between honouring sampling config or not, I'm for doing it. But users may complain about the opposite, ie. we don't report all drops anymore. If that happens then we should make that a configurable choice. /lgtm

or we tell them to see every possible drop u need to use sampling of 1 ? like we do with DNS latency for example

[msherif1234]

@memodi will this impact any of your automation do u guys need to have a qo with this PR b4 merge ? with this PR all features will respect the configured sampling b4 the PR regular TC and DNS were the only one respecting the configured sample, now we adding pkt drop and flow RTT to provide symmetric behavior across all netobserv features

[memodi]

thanks @msherif1234 for the heads up. It shouldn't impact our tests and it will be covered by our regression tests, we use sampling 1 for all our tests anyway. Feel free to add no-qe label if you agree regression tests are sufficient on this one.

[msherif1234]

/approve

[openshift-ci]

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: msherif1234

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

• OWNERS [msherif1234]

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment