NETOBSERV-1312: remove GC from ring buff mapper not needed

[msherif1234]

Description

doing GC for ring buff was adding GC cpu overhead while its not really needed, this was very obvious when use sampling: 1 and run with load ./hey-ho.sh -r 5 -z 10m -p -n 3 -q 800 -d 10

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).

[msherif1234]

/ok-to-test

[github-actions]

New image:
quay.io/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent:513cfcf

It will expire after two weeks.

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

USER=netobserv VERSION=513cfcf make set-agent-image

[codecov]

Codecov Report

Patch coverage: 81.81% and project coverage change: +0.04% 🎉

Comparison is base (2eae149) 39.51% compared to head (46af41c) 39.56%.
Report is 4 commits behind head on main.

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main     #185      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   39.51%   39.56%   +0.04%     
==========================================
  Files          31       31              
  Lines        2394     2391       -3     
==========================================
  Hits          946      946              
+ Misses       1391     1388       -3     
  Partials       57       57              

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	39.56% <81.81%> (+0.04%)	⬆️

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

Files Changed	Coverage Δ
pkg/flow/tracer_ringbuf.go	22.95% <66.66%> (+1.07%)	⬆️
pkg/flow/tracer_map.go	78.57% <83.33%> (ø)
pkg/agent/agent.go	37.84% <100.00%> (ø)

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

[msherif1234]

/ok-to-test

[msherif1234]

/ok-to-test

[github-actions]

New image:
quay.io/netobserv/netobserv-ebpf-agent:8b7fa5f

It will expire after two weeks.

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

USER=netobserv VERSION=8b7fa5f make set-agent-image

[jotak]

LGTM but waiting for perf tests

[nathan-weinberg]

Will post Perf test results here once they are available 👍

[nathan-weinberg]

I have run a node-density-heavy test as detailed in our QE test case using this new eBPF image

Overall we did see performance improvements versus what is currently in our downstream bundles, see here for details

The full data sheet from the run can be found here

[jotak]

I'm fine to take this PR and I'll close my other one #184
They both show equivalent gains in CPU while this one keeping used memory lower.
/lgtm

[jotak]

@msherif1234 can you backport on 1.4 ?

[openshift-ci-robot]

@msherif1234: This pull request references NETOBSERV-1312 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 "4.15.0" version, but no target version was set.

In response to this:

Description

doing GC for ring buff was adding GC cpu overhead while its not really needed, this was very obvious when use sampling: 1 and run with load ./hey-ho.sh -r 5 -z 10m -p -n 3 -q 800 -d 10

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 kubernetes/test-infra repository.

[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

[nathan-weinberg]

/label qe-approved