bazel/openssl: replace runtime-dir patch with a new install-prefix

[chouquette]

What does this PR do?

Update the patch we introduced to avoid baking references to bazel sandbox in the OpenSSL binaries to a new version, matching the upstream PR review

Motivation

Keeping in sync with the upstream patch & ensuring that everything still works before sending the new iteration for review

Describe how you validated your changes

//deps/openssl:check_no_sandbox_paths locally & CI

Additional Notes

[github-actions]

@codex review

[chatgpt-codex-connector]

Codex Review: Didn't find any major issues. You're on a roll.

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".

[datadog-official]

✨ Fix all issues with BitsAI

⚠️ Warnings

🚦 2 Pipeline jobs failed

DataDog/datadog-agent | unit_tests_notify     

🔄 Retry job. This looks flaky and may succeed on retry.

Command 'ls junit-tests_*.tgz' failed. Error: ls: cannot access 'junit-tests_*.tgz': No such file or directory. Failed to create pod sandbox due to insufficient IPs available on the node.

DataDog/datadog-agent | oracle: [21.3.0-xe]     

🛟 This job is unlikely to succeed on retry. Please review your pipeline configuration.

failed to ping oracle instance: ORA-12514: TNS:listener does not currently know of service requested in connect descriptor

Useful? React with 👍 / 👎

_{This comment will be updated automatically if new data arrives.
🔗 Commit SHA: 86279bd | Docs | Datadog PR Page | Give us feedback!}

[dd-octo-sts]

Files inventory check summary

File checks results against ancestor fa1a5b06:

Results for datadog-agent_7.81.0~devel.git.143.86279bd.pipeline.114511443-1_amd64.deb:

No change detected

[cit-pr-commenter-54b7da]

Regression Detector

Regression Detector Results

Metrics dashboard
Target profiles
Run ID: 904f8b30-c293-4663-810e-4ea78b7e3fda

Baseline: fa1a5b0
Comparison: 86279bd
Diff

❌ Experiments with retried target crashes

This is a critical error. One or more replicates failed with a non-zero exit code. These replicates may have been retried. See Replicate Execution Details for more information.

• quality_gate_idle

Optimization Goals: ✅ No significant changes detected

Experiments ignored for regressions

Regressions in experiments with settings containing erratic: true are ignored.

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	trials	links
➖	docker_containers_cpu	% cpu utilization	-4.35	[-7.24, -1.45]	1	Logs

Fine details of change detection per experiment

perf	experiment	goal	Δ mean %	Δ mean % CI	trials	links
➖	quality_gate_logs	% cpu utilization	+2.81	[+1.69, +3.94]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	docker_containers_memory	memory utilization	+0.72	[+0.62, +0.82]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_20mb_12k_contexts_20_senders	memory utilization	+0.63	[+0.58, +0.68]	1	Logs
➖	ddot_logs	memory utilization	+0.56	[+0.50, +0.62]	1	Logs
➖	ddot_metrics_sum_delta	memory utilization	+0.44	[+0.25, +0.63]	1	Logs
➖	ddot_metrics_sum_cumulativetodelta_exporter	memory utilization	+0.36	[+0.12, +0.59]	1	Logs
➖	ddot_metrics_sum_cumulative	memory utilization	+0.21	[+0.05, +0.37]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.06	[-0.45, +0.57]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.04	[-0.41, +0.49]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api	ingress throughput	+0.04	[-0.17, +0.25]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	egress throughput	+0.04	[-0.37, +0.44]	1	Logs
➖	ddot_metrics	memory utilization	+0.03	[-0.18, +0.24]	1	Logs
➖	uds_dogstatsd_to_api_v3	ingress throughput	+0.02	[-0.18, +0.23]	1	Logs
➖	tcp_dd_logs_filter_exclude	ingress throughput	-0.00	[-0.09, +0.09]	1	Logs
➖	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	egress throughput	-0.02	[-0.17, +0.13]	1	Logs
➖	file_tree	memory utilization	-0.15	[-0.19, -0.10]	1	Logs
➖	otlp_ingest_metrics	memory utilization	-0.32	[-0.48, -0.17]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_idle	memory utilization	-0.34	[-0.39, -0.29]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	tcp_syslog_to_blackhole	ingress throughput	-0.34	[-0.55, -0.14]	1	Logs
➖	otlp_ingest_logs	memory utilization	-0.61	[-0.70, -0.51]	1	Logs
➖	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory utilization	-0.63	[-0.69, -0.57]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	quality_gate_metrics_logs	memory utilization	-0.65	[-0.89, -0.41]	1	Logs bounds checks dashboard
➖	docker_containers_cpu	% cpu utilization	-4.35	[-7.24, -1.45]	1	Logs

Bounds Checks: ✅ Passed

perf	experiment	bounds_check_name	replicates_passed	observed_value	links
✅	docker_containers_cpu	simple_check_run	10/10	559 ≥ 26
✅	docker_containers_memory	memory_usage	10/10	245.49MiB ≤ 370MiB
✅	docker_containers_memory	simple_check_run	10/10	565 ≥ 26
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10	0.16GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅	file_to_blackhole_0ms_latency	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B
✅	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10	0.20GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅	file_to_blackhole_1000ms_latency	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B
✅	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10	0.17GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅	file_to_blackhole_100ms_latency	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B
✅	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	memory_usage	10/10	0.18GiB ≤ 1.20GiB
✅	file_to_blackhole_500ms_latency	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B
✅	quality_gate_idle	intake_connections	10/10	3 ≤ 4	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle	memory_usage	10/10	143.19MiB ≤ 147MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle	total_bytes_received	10/10	745.65KiB ≤ 819.20KiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle_all_features	intake_connections	10/10	2 ≤ 4	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle_all_features	memory_usage	10/10	427.46MiB ≤ 495MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_idle_all_features	total_bytes_received	10/10	1.12MiB ≤ 1.25MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	intake_connections	10/10	4 ≤ 6	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	memory_usage	10/10	176.18MiB ≤ 195MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_logs	total_bytes_received	10/10	264.79MiB ≤ 292MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	cpu_usage	10/10	356.82 ≤ 2000	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	intake_connections	10/10	3 ≤ 6	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	memory_usage	10/10	385.39MiB ≤ 430MiB	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	missed_bytes	10/10	0B = 0B	bounds checks dashboard
✅	quality_gate_metrics_logs	total_bytes_received	10/10	0.94GiB ≤ 1.04GiB	bounds checks dashboard

Explanation

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

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

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".

Replicate Execution Details

We run multiple replicates for each experiment/variant. However, we allow replicates to be automatically retried if there are any failures, up to 8 times, at which point the replicate is marked dead and we are unable to run analysis for the entire experiment. We call each of these attempts at running replicates a replicate execution. This section lists all replicate executions that failed due to the target crashing or being oom killed.

Note: In the below tables we bucket failures by experiment, variant, and failure type. For each of these buckets we list out the replicate indexes that failed with an annotation signifying how many times said replicate failed with the given failure mode. In the below example the baseline variant of the experiment named experiment_with_failures had two replicates that failed by oom kills. Replicate 0, which failed 8 executions, and replicate 1 which failed 6 executions, all with the same failure mode.

Experiment	Variant	Replicates	Failure	Logs	Debug Dashboard
experiment_with_failures	baseline	0 (x8) 1 (x6)	Oom killed		Debug Dashboard

The debug dashboard links will take you to a debugging dashboard specifically designed to investigate replicate execution failures.

❌ Retried Normal Replicate Execution Failures (non-profiling)

Experiment	Variant	Replicates	Failure	Debug Dashboard
quality_gate_idle	baseline	5	Oom killed	Debug Dashboard

CI Pass/Fail Decision

✅ Passed. All Quality Gates passed.

• quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check cpu_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_metrics_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle_all_features, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check missed_bytes: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_logs, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle, bounds check total_bytes_received: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle, bounds check intake_connections: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.
• quality_gate_idle, bounds check memory_usage: 10/10 replicas passed. Gate passed.

[dd-octo-sts]

Static quality checks

✅ Please find below the results from static quality gates
Comparison made with ancestor fa1a5b0
📊 Static Quality Gates Dashboard
🔗 SQG Job

33 successful checks with minimal change (< 2 KiB)

	Quality gate	Current Size
✅	agent_deb_amd64	745.166 MiB
✅	agent_deb_amd64_fips	702.928 MiB
✅	agent_heroku_amd64	310.122 MiB
✅	agent_msi	609.115 MiB
✅	agent_rpm_amd64	745.149 MiB
✅	agent_rpm_amd64_fips	702.912 MiB
✅	agent_rpm_arm64	722.713 MiB
✅	agent_rpm_arm64_fips	683.641 MiB
✅	agent_suse_amd64	745.149 MiB
✅	agent_suse_amd64_fips	702.912 MiB
✅	agent_suse_arm64	722.713 MiB
✅	agent_suse_arm64_fips	683.641 MiB
✅	docker_agent_amd64	805.307 MiB
✅	docker_agent_arm64	807.691 MiB
✅	docker_agent_jmx_amd64	996.226 MiB
✅	docker_agent_jmx_arm64	987.390 MiB
✅	docker_cluster_agent_amd64	206.995 MiB
✅	docker_cluster_agent_arm64	220.952 MiB
✅	docker_cws_instrumentation_amd64	7.154 MiB
✅	docker_cws_instrumentation_arm64	6.689 MiB
✅	docker_dogstatsd_amd64	39.487 MiB
✅	docker_dogstatsd_arm64	37.690 MiB
✅	docker_host_profiler_amd64	302.187 MiB
✅	docker_host_profiler_arm64	313.675 MiB
✅	dogstatsd_deb_amd64	30.143 MiB
✅	dogstatsd_deb_arm64	28.268 MiB
✅	dogstatsd_rpm_amd64	30.143 MiB
✅	dogstatsd_suse_amd64	30.143 MiB
✅	iot_agent_deb_amd64	44.578 MiB
✅	iot_agent_deb_arm64	41.535 MiB
✅	iot_agent_deb_armhf	42.243 MiB
✅	iot_agent_rpm_amd64	44.578 MiB
✅	iot_agent_suse_amd64	44.578 MiB

[aiuto]

I trust this is correct. But....
I think we are making a big mistake with patch files. Patches are essentially impossible to reason about. You obviously have a private fork where you develop the new code, test it, then generate the patch.

Let's just take the modified file from your fork and check it in as third_party/openssl/Configurations/unix-Makefile-tmpl. Then we use the 'files' parameter of the module rule to pull that in.