omnibus: build python, openssl & FIPS provider on Windows #32096
Conversation
Turns out MAKEOPTS is gentoo specific
|
[Fast Unit Tests Report] On pipeline 51046626 (CI Visibility). The following jobs did not run any unit tests: Jobs:
If you modified Go files and expected unit tests to run in these jobs, please double check the job logs. If you think tests should have been executed reach out to #agent-devx-help |
Package size comparisonComparison with ancestor Diff per package
Decision |
Regression DetectorRegression Detector ResultsMetrics dashboard Baseline: d2548eb Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected
|
| perf | experiment | goal | Δ mean % | Δ mean % CI | trials | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ➖ | file_tree | memory utilization | +1.18 | [+1.06, +1.30] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu | % cpu utilization | +0.66 | [-0.07, +1.38] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_syslog_to_blackhole | ingress throughput | +0.46 | [+0.41, +0.51] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | otel_to_otel_logs | ingress throughput | +0.40 | [-0.27, +1.06] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle | memory utilization | +0.14 | [+0.09, +0.19] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | egress throughput | +0.03 | [-0.74, +0.81] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.44, +0.49] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | egress throughput | +0.02 | [-0.63, +0.67] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | egress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.87, +0.88] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude | ingress throughput | +0.00 | [-0.01, +0.01] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | uds_dogstatsd_to_api | ingress throughput | -0.02 | [-0.13, +0.09] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.03 | [-0.80, +0.75] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.04 | [-0.88, +0.81] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.04 | [-0.67, +0.59] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | egress throughput | -0.21 | [-0.98, +0.55] | 1 | Logs |
| ➖ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory utilization | -0.33 | [-0.45, -0.21] | 1 | Logs bounds checks dashboard |
| ➖ | quality_gate_logs | % cpu utilization | -1.36 | [-4.29, +1.56] | 1 | Logs |
Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed
| perf | experiment | bounds_check_name | replicates_passed | links |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http1 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency_http2 | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency_linear_load | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_300ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency | memory_usage | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_idle_all_features | memory_usage | 10/10 | bounds checks dashboard |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | lost_bytes | 10/10 | |
| ✅ | quality_gate_logs | memory_usage | 10/10 |
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:
-
Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.
-
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.
-
Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".
CI Pass/Fail Decision
✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.
- quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check lost_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
- quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
| ############################### | ||
| # Setup openssl dependency... # | ||
| ############################### | ||
| mkdir "externals/openssl-bin-3.0.15/amd64/include" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Any chance we can avoid hardcoding the version here?
| ############################### | ||
| # Setup openssl dependency... # | ||
| ############################### | ||
| mkdir "externals/openssl-bin-3.0.15/amd64/include" |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❓ question:
should this be kept in sync with the openssl3 recipe?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Not necessarily. That should match whatever the python build system expects, but as long as OpenSSL keeps a stable & backward compatible ABI & API (which they do) we can use any 3.x version we want
|
|
||
| # note that starting with 3.7.3 on Windows, the zip should be created without the built-in pip | ||
| source :url => "https://dd-agent-omnibus.s3.amazonaws.com/python-windows-#{version}-amd64.zip", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
❓ question: Do we build the exact same versions we previously had? Asking for the changelog mainly
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yes, we still target 3.12.6 for now. The main change is that we can now use any openssl version we want, not the one that is shipped with the python release
What does this PR do?
Start building OpenSSL, Python and the FIPS provider on Windows
Motivation
This allows us to have better control over our OpenSSL versions, since we will now control it on Windows.
Buliding the FIPS provider is required for FedRAMP High
Describe how you validated your changes
Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs
The FIPS provider recipe is not technically FIPS compliant since we switched from
make installtomake install_fipsThis is a shortcut to have something working on windows, as we need to have
pod2manavailable.This tool is usually bundled with perl, but we need a very specific version of perl to be available for OpenSSL to build on Windows (a version that uses the native
\as path separators) and so far I haven't found an msys package that provides both the correct path separator andpod2manAdditional Notes