Refactoring src/ausearch-report.c:output_interpreted_node()

[Burn Alting]

Thanks Steve,

Patch to follow this weekend.

Rgds

On Wed, 2014-10-01 at 18:28 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
> On Thursday, October 02, 2014 07:52:47 AM Burn Alting wrote:
> > On Wed, 2014-10-01 at 17:19 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
> > > On Thursday, October 02, 2014 07:08:13 AM Burn Alting wrote:
> > > > On Wed, 2014-10-01 at 14:54 -0400, Steve Grubb wrote:
> > > > > > I am uncertain what effect of accepting this additional format would
> > > > > > have when adding rules to the running audit system - i.e.
> > > > > > audit_name_to_msg_type() is called by autrace/auditctl when parsing
> > > > > > rules (ie the msgtype field name).
> > > > > 
> > > > > I think ausearch-report.c might be the place that needs updating.
> > > > 
> > > > So, could we modify output_interpreted_node() to no longer re-parse the
> > > > 
> > > >    [node=<node>] type=<type> msg=audit(<epochsecs>.<msecs>:<serial>)
> > > > 
> > > > header and pass both the lnode and llist->e which has this data already
> > > > as the code
> > > > 
> > > >           if (num == -1) {
> > > >           
> > > >               // see if we are older and wiser now.
> > > >               bptr = strchr(str, '[');
> > > >               if (bptr && bptr < ptr) {
> > > >               
> > > >                   char *eptr;
> > > >                   bptr++;
> > > >                   eptr = strchr(bptr, ']');
> > > >                   if (eptr) {
> > > >                   
> > > >                        *eptr = 0;
> > > >                        errno = 0;
> > > >                        num = strtoul(bptr, NULL, 10);
> > > >                        *eptr = ']';
> > > >                        if (errno)
> > > >                        
> > > >                            num = -1;
> > > >                   
> > > >                   }
> > > >                
> > > >                }
> > > >          
> > > >          }
> > > > 
> > > > which parses for
> > > > 
> > > >     type=.*[n].*
> > > > 
> > > > is no longer needed as we don't have that format any more?
> > > 
> > > That is a very loose check for UNKNOWN[####]. If you see a performance
> > > improvement by refactoring this function, please send a patch. The output
> > > needs to be identical to the old way.
> > > 
> > > Thanks,
> > > -Steve
> > 
> > I can provide a patch to refactor this part of the code, but I want to
> > confirm there is no longer a need to parse for
> > 
> >   type=some_text '[' integer_type ']' some_other_text
> 
> While this may have been implied by the code, the fact is that [ ] would only 
> be in type fields when its unknown[####].
> 
> 
> > given my refactoring will rely upon the parsing already done by
> > lib/lookup_table.c:audit_name_to_msg_type(). Remember this routine only
> > parses for
> > Given
> >         type=<type_value>
> > then
> >         <type_value>
> > is parsed for
> >         - a known string
> >         - a long integer number, n, found in the specific string
> >                 "UNKNOWN[n]"
> >         - a long integer number, n, found in the specific string
> >                 "n"
> 
> These 3 formats are all that it can ever be. So, I think you have a correct 
> understanding.
> 
> -Steve