Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

NETOBSERV-1507: some arch still missing fentry hook types fallback to kprobe [BP 1.5] #267

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Feb 15, 2024

Conversation

msherif1234
Copy link
Contributor

Signed-off-by: Mohamed Mahmoud mmahmoud@redhat.com
(cherry picked from commit 43038f3)

Description

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).

…lback to kprobe

Signed-off-by: Mohamed Mahmoud <mmahmoud@redhat.com>
(cherry picked from commit 43038f3)
@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link
Collaborator

openshift-ci-robot commented Feb 14, 2024

@msherif1234: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1507 which is a valid jira issue.

In response to this:

Signed-off-by: Mohamed Mahmoud mmahmoud@redhat.com
(cherry picked from commit 43038f3)

Description

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.

@msherif1234 msherif1234 changed the title NETOBSERV-1507: some arch still missing fentry hook types fallback to kprobe {BP 1.5] NETOBSERV-1507: some arch still missing fentry hook types fallback to kprobe [BP 1.5] Feb 14, 2024
Copy link

codecov bot commented Feb 14, 2024

Codecov Report

Attention: 15 lines in your changes are missing coverage. Please review.

Comparison is base (d724f7e) 33.65% compared to head (a22d042) 33.53%.

Files Patch % Lines
pkg/ebpf/tracer.go 0.00% 14 Missing ⚠️
pkg/ebpf/bpf_x86_bpfel.go 0.00% 1 Missing ⚠️
Additional details and impacted files
@@               Coverage Diff               @@
##           release-1.5     #267      +/-   ##
===============================================
- Coverage        33.65%   33.53%   -0.12%     
===============================================
  Files               40       40              
  Lines             3542     3554      +12     
===============================================
  Hits              1192     1192              
- Misses            2281     2293      +12     
  Partials            69       69              
Flag Coverage Δ
unittests 33.53% <0.00%> (-0.12%) ⬇️

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

☔ View full report in Codecov by Sentry.
📢 Have feedback on the report? Share it here.

@jotak
Copy link
Member

jotak commented Feb 15, 2024

/lgtm

@msherif1234
Copy link
Contributor Author

/approve

Copy link

openshift-ci bot commented Feb 15, 2024

[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:

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

@openshift-merge-bot openshift-merge-bot bot merged commit af0e21e into netobserv:release-1.5 Feb 15, 2024
9 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

3 participants