usm: Refactor nodejs monitor to use new uprobe attacher

[gjulianm]

What does this PR do?

This PR applies the new uprobe attacher introduced in #27663 to the NodeJS monitor.

Motivation

Additional Notes

Possible Drawbacks / Trade-offs

Describe how to test/QA your changes

Validated in system-probe load testing environment, using the soak_test and processes scenarios. Base version is agent release 7.57

soak_test

Summary: similar accuracy results, no significant difference in resource usage.

Dashboard

Resource usage:

Accuracy for base:

Accuracy for new (this branch):

Accuracy comparison:

processes

Summary: negligible resource usage differences.

Dashboard

Resource usage:

[cit-pr-commenter]

Go Package Import Differences

Baseline: fdc7ee2
Comparison: c8abe71

binary	os	arch	change
system-probe	linux	amd64	+4, -0 +github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/ebpf/uprobes +github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/network/protocols/http/testutil +github.com/lorenzosaino/go-sysctl +golang.org/x/net/netutil
system-probe	linux	arm64	+4, -0 +github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/ebpf/uprobes +github.com/DataDog/datadog-agent/pkg/network/protocols/http/testutil +github.com/lorenzosaino/go-sysctl +golang.org/x/net/netutil

[pr-commenter]

Test changes on VM

Use this command from test-infra-definitions to manually test this PR changes on a VM:

inv create-vm --pipeline-id=45087902 --os-family=ubuntu

Note: This applies to commit c8abe71

[pr-commenter]

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Run ID: 7b666a7a-3fcd-4ece-9105-f965b9112212 Metrics dashboard Target profiles

Baseline: fdc7ee2
Comparison: c8abe71

Performance changes are noted in the perf column of each table:

• ✅ = significantly better comparison variant performance
• ❌ = significantly worse comparison variant performance
• ➖ = no significant change in performance

No significant changes in experiment optimization goals

Confidence level: 90.00%
Effect size tolerance: |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%

There were no significant changes in experiment optimization goals at this confidence level and effect size tolerance.

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	trials	links
➖	pycheck_lots_of_tags	% cpu utilization	+2.34	[-0.29, +4.97]	1	Logs
➖	idle	memory utilization	+1.05	[+1.00, +1.09]	1	Logs
➖	file_tree	memory utilization	+0.31	[+0.22, +0.40]	1	Logs
➖	tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude	ingress throughput	+0.00	[-0.01, +0.01]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api	ingress throughput	-0.01	[-0.12, +0.10]	1	Logs
➖	tcp_syslog_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.04	[-0.08, +0.00]	1	Logs
➖	otel_to_otel_logs	ingress throughput	-0.09	[-0.90, +0.71]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api_cpu	% cpu utilization	-0.16	[-0.90, +0.59]	1	Logs
➖	basic_py_check	% cpu utilization	-1.86	[-4.62, +0.90]	1	Logs

Bounds Checks

perf	experiment	bounds_check_name	replicates_passed
✅	idle	memory_usage	10/10

Explanation

A regression test is an A/B test of target performance in a repeatable rig, where "performance" is measured as "comparison variant minus baseline variant" for an optimization goal (e.g., ingress throughput). Due to intrinsic variability in measuring that goal, we can only estimate its mean value for each experiment; we report uncertainty in that value as a 90.00% confidence interval denoted "Δ mean % CI".

For each experiment, we decide whether a change in performance is a "regression" -- a change worth investigating further -- if all of the following criteria are true:

1. Its estimated |Δ mean %| ≥ 5.00%, indicating the change is big enough to merit a closer look.

2. Its 90.00% confidence interval "Δ mean % CI" does not contain zero, indicating that if our statistical model is accurate, there is at least a 90.00% chance there is a difference in performance between baseline and comparison variants.

3. Its configuration does not mark it "erratic".

[agent-platform-auto-pr]

[Fast Unit Tests Report]

On pipeline 45087902 (CI Visibility). The following jobs did not run any unit tests:

Jobs:

• tests_deb-arm64-py3
• tests_deb-x64-py3
• tests_flavor_dogstatsd_deb-x64
• tests_flavor_heroku_deb-x64
• tests_flavor_iot_deb-x64
• tests_rpm-arm64-py3
• tests_rpm-x64-py3
• tests_windows-x64

If you modified Go files and expected unit tests to run in these jobs, please double check the job logs. If you think tests should have been executed reach out to #agent-devx-help

[guyarb]

if we failed creating the attacher, why do we continue?

[gjulianm]

An oversight. I changed the code to check and return the error if it happens