Drop provider arg from Feature interface methods by levan-m · Pull Request #3007 · DataDog/datadog-operator

levan-m · 2026-05-12T20:05:25Z

CONTP-1577

What does this PR do?

Drop provider from feature interface to switch to DDA/I metadata based lookup.

This "removes" COS support from two features which is effectively non-functional since not used in DDAI code path.

Motivation

What inspired you to submit this pull request?

Additional Notes

Anything else we should know when reviewing?

Minimum Agent Versions

Are there minimum versions of the Datadog Agent and/or Cluster Agent required?

Agent: vX.Y.Z
Cluster Agent: vX.Y.Z

Describe your test plan

Write there any instructions and details you may have to test your PR.

Checklist

PR has at least one valid label: bug, enhancement, refactoring, documentation, tooling, and/or dependencies
PR has a milestone or the qa/skip-qa label
All commits are signed (see: signing commits)

CONTP-1577

chatgpt-codex-connector

💡 Codex Review

Here are some automated review suggestions for this pull request.

Reviewed commit: 4a7e6de580

ℹ️ About Codex in GitHub

Codex has been enabled to automatically review pull requests in this repo. Reviews are triggered when you

Open a pull request for review
Mark a draft as ready
Comment "@codex review".

If Codex has suggestions, it will comment; otherwise it will react with 👍.

When you sign up for Codex through ChatGPT, Codex can also answer questions or update the PR, like "@codex address that feedback".

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-05-12T20:11:43Z

 // Configure is used to configure the feature from a v2alpha1.DatadogAgent instance.
 func (f *controlPlaneMonitoringFeature) Configure(dda metav1.Object, ddaSpec *v2alpha1.DatadogAgentSpec, _ *v2alpha1.RemoteConfigConfiguration) (reqComp feature.RequiredComponents) {
 	f.owner = dda
+	f.provider = dda.GetAnnotations()[providercaps.ProviderAnnotationKey]


Restore provider fallback when annotation is absent

After dropping the provider parameter, this feature now derives f.provider only from dda annotations. In this commit, there is no corresponding write path for providercaps.ProviderAnnotationKey, so f.provider is empty in normal reconciles and the OpenShift/EKS branches in ManageDependencies/ManageClusterAgent are skipped. That regresses control-plane monitoring setup on those providers unless users manually inject this internal annotation.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

that's intended change, annotation will be user provided or detected and set by controller.

chatgpt-codex-connector · 2026-05-12T20:11:43Z

 	// src volume mount
-	_, providerValue := kubernetes.GetProviderLabelKeyValue(provider)
-	if providerValue != kubernetes.GKECosType {
-		srcVol, srcVolMount := volume.GetVolumes(common.SrcVolumeName, common.SrcVolumePath, common.SrcVolumePath, true)
-		managers.VolumeMount().AddVolumeMountToContainer(&srcVolMount, apicommon.SystemProbeContainerName)
-		managers.Volume().AddVolume(&srcVol)
-	}
+	srcVol, srcVolMount := volume.GetVolumes(common.SrcVolumeName, common.SrcVolumePath, common.SrcVolumePath, true)
+	managers.VolumeMount().AddVolumeMountToContainer(&srcVolMount, apicommon.SystemProbeContainerName)
+	managers.Volume().AddVolume(&srcVol)


Preserve GKE-COS guard before adding src hostPath

This change unconditionally adds the /usr/src hostPath for OOM Kill, removing the previous gke-cos exclusion. That is a behavioral regression for GKE COS nodes, which previously got a different pod template specifically avoiding this mount. If provider handling is being migrated elsewhere, this feature still needs an equivalent guard to avoid changing system-probe volume behavior on COS clusters.

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎.

this was dead code after DDAI switch. Will have a separate PR for adding this back.

I think this mount is only used for runtime compilation, which is rarely used these days. It is strange that it is only on the OOM/TCPQ checks. It could be used by many eBPF-based products in system-probe.

I think it might be safer to just remove the mount in this PR, and then add it back once you have the provider value to check against again.

codecov-commenter · 2026-05-12T20:27:43Z

Codecov Report

❌ Patch coverage is 42.80936% with 171 lines in your changes missing coverage. Please review.
✅ Project coverage is 40.76%. Comparing base (097216f) to head (ad3bec8).

Files with missing lines	Patch %	Lines
.../controller/datadogagent/feature/test/testsuite.go	0.00%	7 Missing ⚠️
...dogagent/feature/controlplanemonitoring/feature.go	45.45%	4 Missing and 2 partials ⚠️
...l/controller/datadogagent/feature/dummy/feature.go	0.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
...ller/datadogagent/feature/enabledefault/feature.go	0.00%	6 Missing ⚠️
...ntroller/datadogagent/feature/dataplane/feature.go	28.57%	5 Missing ⚠️
...ler/datadogagent/feature/flightrecorder/feature.go	28.57%	5 Missing ⚠️
...ller/datadogagent/feature/logcollection/feature.go	44.44%	5 Missing ⚠️
...al/controller/datadogagent/feature/sbom/feature.go	28.57%	5 Missing ⚠️
...atadogagent/feature/admissioncontroller/feature.go	33.33%	4 Missing ⚠️
.../controller/datadogagent/feature/appsec/feature.go	33.33%	4 Missing ⚠️
... and 37 more

Additional details and impacted files

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##             main    #3007      +/-   ##
==========================================
- Coverage   40.77%   40.76%   -0.02%     
==========================================
  Files         332      332              
  Lines       28204    28199       -5     
==========================================
- Hits        11500    11495       -5     
  Misses      15929    15929              
  Partials      775      775

Flag	Coverage Δ
unittests	`40.76% <42.80%> (-0.02%)`	⬇️

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

Files with missing lines	Coverage Δ
...r/datadogagent/feature/otelagentgateway/feature.go	`90.97% <100.00%> (ø)`
internal/controller/datadogagent/feature/types.go	`22.10% <ø> (ø)`
...ogagentinternal/controller_reconcile_v2_helpers.go	`38.51% <100.00%> (ø)`
pkg/kubernetes/provider.go	`86.36% <ø> (ø)`
...al/controller/datadogagent/component_reconciler.go	`6.06% <0.00%> (ø)`
...ller/datadogagent/feature/clusterchecks/feature.go	`66.45% <88.88%> (ø)`
...atadogagent/feature/kubernetesstatecore/feature.go	`79.25% <83.33%> (ø)`
...oller/datadogagentinternal/component_reconciler.go	`0.00% <0.00%> (ø)`
...nal/controller/datadogagent/feature/apm/feature.go	`70.77% <77.77%> (ø)`
...tadogagent/feature/orchestratorexplorer/feature.go	`71.94% <66.66%> (ø)`
... and 41 more

Continue to review full report in Codecov by Sentry.

Legend - Click here to learn more
Δ = absolute <relative> (impact), ø = not affected, ? = missing data
Powered by Codecov. Last update 097216f...ad3bec8. Read the comment docs.

🚀 New features to boost your workflow:

❄️ Test Analytics: Detect flaky tests, report on failures, and find test suite problems.

Drop provider arg from Feature interface methods

4a7e6de

CONTP-1577

levan-m added this to the v1.28.0 milestone May 12, 2026

levan-m requested a review from a team May 12, 2026 20:05

levan-m added refactoring qa/skip-qa labels May 12, 2026

levan-m requested review from a team as code owners May 12, 2026 20:05

levan-m requested review from chrisnad, jmw51798 and pierreprinetti May 12, 2026 20:05

github-actions Bot added team/action-platform team/agent-apm team/agent-data-plane team/agent-discovery labels May 12, 2026

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot reviewed May 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

github-actions Bot added team/action-platform team/agent-apm team/agent-data-plane team/agent-discovery team/agent-log-pipelines team/agent-metric-pipelines team/agent-security team/asm-go labels May 12, 2026

This comment has been minimized.

Sign in to view

Fix control plane monitoring feature

ad3bec8

chrisnad approved these changes May 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

vitkyrka approved these changes May 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

tbavelier approved these changes May 13, 2026

View reviewed changes

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Drop provider arg from Feature interface methods#3007

Drop provider arg from Feature interface methods#3007
levan-m wants to merge 2 commits into
mainfrom
levan-m/drop-feature-provider

levan-m commented May 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot May 12, 2026

Uh oh!

levan-m May 12, 2026

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot May 12, 2026

Uh oh!

levan-m May 12, 2026

Uh oh!

brycekahle May 14, 2026

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

codecov-commenter commented May 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

Conversation

levan-m commented May 12, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

What does this PR do?

Motivation

Additional Notes

Minimum Agent Versions

Describe your test plan

Checklist

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

💡 Codex Review

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot May 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

levan-m May 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

chatgpt-codex-connector Bot May 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

levan-m May 12, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

brycekahle May 14, 2026

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

This comment has been minimized.

codecov-commenter commented May 12, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Codecov Report

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

7 participants

levan-m commented May 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading

codecov-commenter commented May 12, 2026 •

edited

Loading