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

ignore ebpf events with empty container name #163

Merged
merged 1 commit into from
Dec 21, 2023
Merged

ignore ebpf events with empty container name #163

merged 1 commit into from
Dec 21, 2023

Conversation

matthyx
Copy link
Contributor

@matthyx matthyx commented Dec 21, 2023

Type

Bug fix


Description

This PR introduces a check to ignore eBPF events with an empty container name. This change is applied to various worker pools including capabilities, exec, open, network, and DNS worker pools. The main changes are:

  • Added a condition to return from the worker function if the container name in the event is empty.
  • Updated error messages for worker pool creation failures.

PR changes walkthrough

Relevant files                                                                                                                                 
Bug fix
1 files
container_watcher.go                                                                               
    pkg/containerwatcher/v1/container_watcher.go

    Added checks to ignore eBPF events with an empty container
    name in capabilities, exec, open, network, and DNS worker
    pools. Also, updated the error messages for worker pool
    creation failures.
+22/-12

@matthyx matthyx requested a review from dwertent December 21, 2023 10:24
@matthyx matthyx added the release Create release label Dec 21, 2023
Copy link

PR Description updated to latest commit (2d88955)

Copy link

PR Analysis

  • 🎯 Main theme: Ignoring eBPF events with empty container names
  • 📝 PR summary: This PR introduces a check to ignore eBPF events with an empty container name in various worker pools including capabilities, exec, open, network, and DNS worker pools. It also updates error messages for worker pool creation failures.
  • 📌 Type of PR: Bug fix
  • 🧪 Relevant tests added: No
  • ⏱️ Estimated effort to review [1-5]: 2, because the changes are straightforward and limited to a single file. However, understanding the context might require some knowledge about eBPF events and worker pools.
  • 🔒 Security concerns: No security concerns found

PR Feedback

  • 💡 General suggestions: The changes in this PR are clear and concise. However, it would be beneficial to add tests that verify the new behavior. This would ensure that the changes work as expected and prevent potential regressions in the future.

  • 🤖 Code feedback:
    relevant filepkg/containerwatcher/v1/container_watcher.go
    suggestion      Consider logging when an event with an empty container name is encountered. This could help in debugging and understanding the frequency of such occurrences. [medium]
    relevant lineif event.K8s.ContainerName == "" {

    relevant filepkg/containerwatcher/v1/container_watcher.go
    suggestion      It might be beneficial to encapsulate the check for an empty container name in a separate function. This would avoid code duplication and make the code more maintainable. [medium]
    relevant lineif event.K8s.ContainerName == "" {

How to use

Instructions

To invoke the PR-Agent, add a comment using one of the following commands:
/review: Request a review of your Pull Request.
/describe: Update the PR title and description based on the contents of the PR.
/improve [--extended]: Suggest code improvements. Extended mode provides a higher quality feedback.
/ask <QUESTION>: Ask a question about the PR.
/update_changelog: Update the changelog based on the PR's contents.
/add_docs: Generate docstring for new components introduced in the PR.
/generate_labels: Generate labels for the PR based on the PR's contents.
see the tools guide for more details.

To edit any configuration parameter from the configuration.toml, add --config_path=new_value.
For example: /review --pr_reviewer.extra_instructions="focus on the file: ..."
To list the possible configuration parameters, add a /config comment.

Copy link

Summary:

  • License scan: success
  • Credentials scan: success
  • Vulnerabilities scan: success
  • Unit test: success
  • Go linting: success

@matthyx matthyx merged commit 103a4cd into main Dec 21, 2023
6 checks passed
@matthyx matthyx deleted the empty branch December 21, 2023 11:09
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
Bug fix release Create release
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

2 participants