Skip to content

chore(iast): improve microbenchmarks accuracy [backport 3.4] #13174

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

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: 3.4
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

avara1986
Copy link
Member

Backport #13160 to 3.4

  • remove loops and value config from appsec_iast_aspects/config.yaml and use the default values
  • split appsec_iast_aspects into smaller steps due to the default values returns timeout in the CI
  • Fix exception in appsec_iast_propagation/scenario.py
 File "/app/benchmarks/.venv_baseline/lib/python3.9/site-packages/pyperf/_runner.py", line 494, in task_func
    return time_func(loops, *args)
  File "/app/benchmarks/bm/_scenario.py", line 64, in _pyperf
    run(loops)
  File "/app/benchmarks/scenario.py", line 99, in _
    launch_function(self.iast_enabled, func, self.internal_loop, caller_loop)
  File "/app/benchmarks/scenario.py", line 81, in launch_function
    tainted_value = new_request(enable_propagation)
  File "/app/benchmarks/scenario.py", line 75, in new_request
    taint_pyobject_with_ranges(tainted, (CHECK_RANGES[0],))
  File "/app/benchmarks/scenario.py", line 41, in taint_pyobject_with_ranges
    set_ranges(pyobject, tuple(ranges))
ValueError: iast::propagation::native::error::Tainted Map isn't initialized
Traceback (most recent call last):

Checklist

  • PR author has checked that all the criteria below are met
  • The PR description includes an overview of the change
  • The PR description articulates the motivation for the change
  • The change includes tests OR the PR description describes a testing strategy
  • The PR description notes risks associated with the change, if any
  • Newly-added code is easy to change
  • The change follows the library release note guidelines
  • The change includes or references documentation updates if necessary
  • Backport labels are set (if applicable)

Reviewer Checklist

  • Reviewer has checked that all the criteria below are met
  • Title is accurate
  • All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
  • Avoids breaking API changes
  • Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
  • Newly-added code is easy to change
  • Release note makes sense to a user of the library
  • If necessary, author has acknowledged and discussed the performance implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
  • Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the release branch maintenance policy

- remove `loops` and `value` config from appsec_iast_aspects/config.yaml
and use the default values
- split `appsec_iast_aspects` into smaller steps due to the default
values returns timeout in the CI
- Fix exception in `appsec_iast_propagation/scenario.py`
```
 File "/app/benchmarks/.venv_baseline/lib/python3.9/site-packages/pyperf/_runner.py", line 494, in task_func
    return time_func(loops, *args)
  File "/app/benchmarks/bm/_scenario.py", line 64, in _pyperf
    run(loops)
  File "/app/benchmarks/scenario.py", line 99, in _
    launch_function(self.iast_enabled, func, self.internal_loop, caller_loop)
  File "/app/benchmarks/scenario.py", line 81, in launch_function
    tainted_value = new_request(enable_propagation)
  File "/app/benchmarks/scenario.py", line 75, in new_request
    taint_pyobject_with_ranges(tainted, (CHECK_RANGES[0],))
  File "/app/benchmarks/scenario.py", line 41, in taint_pyobject_with_ranges
    set_ranges(pyobject, tuple(ranges))
ValueError: iast::propagation::native::error::Tainted Map isn't initialized
Traceback (most recent call last):
```
- [x] PR author has checked that all the criteria below are met
- The PR description includes an overview of the change
- The PR description articulates the motivation for the change
- The change includes tests OR the PR description describes a testing
strategy
- The PR description notes risks associated with the change, if any
- Newly-added code is easy to change
- The change follows the [library release note
guidelines](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/releasenotes.html)
- The change includes or references documentation updates if necessary
- Backport labels are set (if
[applicable](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting))

- [x] Reviewer has checked that all the criteria below are met
- Title is accurate
- All changes are related to the pull request's stated goal
- Avoids breaking
[API](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/stable/versioning.html#interfaces)
changes
- Testing strategy adequately addresses listed risks
- Newly-added code is easy to change
- Release note makes sense to a user of the library
- If necessary, author has acknowledged and discussed the performance
implications of this PR as reported in the benchmarks PR comment
- Backport labels are set in a manner that is consistent with the
[release branch maintenance
policy](https://ddtrace.readthedocs.io/en/latest/contributing.html#backporting)

(cherry picked from commit b1950af)
@avara1986 avara1986 added changelog/no-changelog A changelog entry is not required for this PR. ASM Application Security Monitoring labels Apr 11, 2025
Copy link
Contributor

CODEOWNERS have been resolved as:

benchmarks/appsec_iast_aspects_ospath/config.yaml                       @DataDog/asm-python
benchmarks/appsec_iast_aspects_ospath/functions.py                      @DataDog/asm-python
benchmarks/appsec_iast_aspects_ospath/scenario.py                       @DataDog/asm-python
benchmarks/appsec_iast_aspects_re_module/config.yaml                    @DataDog/asm-python
benchmarks/appsec_iast_aspects_re_module/functions.py                   @DataDog/asm-python
benchmarks/appsec_iast_aspects_re_module/scenario.py                    @DataDog/asm-python
benchmarks/appsec_iast_aspects_split/config.yaml                        @DataDog/asm-python
benchmarks/appsec_iast_aspects_split/functions.py                       @DataDog/asm-python
benchmarks/appsec_iast_aspects_split/scenario.py                        @DataDog/asm-python
.gitlab/benchmarks/microbenchmarks.yml                                  @DataDog/python-guild @DataDog/apm-core-python
benchmarks/appsec_iast_aspects/config.yaml                              @DataDog/asm-python
benchmarks/appsec_iast_aspects/functions.py                             @DataDog/asm-python
benchmarks/appsec_iast_propagation/scenario.py                          @DataDog/asm-python

Copy link
Contributor

Bootstrap import analysis

Comparison of import times between this PR and base.

Summary

The average import time from this PR is: 242 ± 3 ms.

The average import time from base is: 245 ± 3 ms.

The import time difference between this PR and base is: -2.5 ± 0.1 ms.

Import time breakdown

The following import paths have shrunk:

ddtrace.auto 2.044 ms (0.84%)
ddtrace.bootstrap.sitecustomize 1.361 ms (0.56%)
ddtrace.bootstrap.preload 1.361 ms (0.56%)
ddtrace.internal.products 1.361 ms (0.56%)
ddtrace.internal.remoteconfig.client 0.646 ms (0.27%)
ddtrace 0.682 ms (0.28%)

@pr-commenter
Copy link

pr-commenter bot commented Apr 11, 2025

Benchmarks

Benchmark execution time: 2025-04-11 12:20:48

Comparing candidate commit 63763af in PR branch backport-13160-to-3.4 with baseline commit 306489d in branch main.

Found 0 performance improvements and 7 performance regressions! Performance is the same for 497 metrics, 2 unstable metrics.

scenario:iast_aspects-ospathbasename_aspect

  • 🟥 execution_time [+1.175µs; +1.235µs] or [+40.164%; +42.215%]

scenario:iast_aspects-ospathdirname_aspect

  • 🟥 execution_time [+1.291µs; +1.350µs] or [+39.254%; +41.047%]

scenario:iast_aspects-ospathjoin_aspect

  • 🟥 execution_time [+1.384µs; +1.448µs] or [+29.687%; +31.057%]

scenario:iast_aspects-ospathnormcase_aspect

  • 🟥 execution_time [+1.139µs; +1.215µs] or [+50.053%; +53.387%]

scenario:iast_aspects-ospathsplit_aspect

  • 🟥 execution_time [+1.328µs; +1.396µs] or [+37.918%; +39.841%]

scenario:iast_aspects-ospathsplitdrive_aspect

  • 🟥 execution_time [+1.225µs; +1.286µs] or [+50.610%; +53.134%]

scenario:iast_aspects-ospathsplitext_aspect

  • 🟥 execution_time [+1.259µs; +1.305µs] or [+38.621%; +40.037%]

@avara1986 avara1986 marked this pull request as ready for review April 11, 2025 13:42
@avara1986 avara1986 requested review from a team as code owners April 11, 2025 13:42
@avara1986 avara1986 requested review from sanchda and juanjux April 11, 2025 13:42
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
ASM Application Security Monitoring changelog/no-changelog A changelog entry is not required for this PR.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants