refactor(userspace/libsinsp): catch filter field-operator compatibility at compile-time instead of run-time #1857
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
poiana
added
release-note
kind/bug
|
/milestone 0.17.0 |
jasondellaluce
force-pushed
the
experiment/comp-check-filter-load-time
branch
4 times, most recently
from
e84f822 to
3993021
Compare
…ir own source file (1) Signed-off-by: Jason Dellaluce <[email protected]>
…ir own source file (2) Signed-off-by: Jason Dellaluce <[email protected]>
…d check compatibility in filter compiler Signed-off-by: Jason Dellaluce <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jason Dellaluce <[email protected]>
… types Signed-off-by: Jason Dellaluce <[email protected]>
jasondellaluce
force-pushed
the
experiment/comp-check-filter-load-time
branch
from
d0a8d67 to
edf3d29
Compare
LucaGuerra
reviewed
May 15, 2024
Signed-off-by: Jason Dellaluce <[email protected]>
LucaGuerra
reviewed
May 15, 2024
Signed-off-by: Jason Dellaluce <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Jason Dellaluce <[email protected]>
LucaGuerra
reviewed
May 16, 2024
| test_filter_compile(factory, "c.buffer bstartswith abc_1", true); | ||
| } | ||
|
|
||
| TEST(sinsp_filter_compiler, operators_field_types_compatibility) |
|
LGTM label has been added. Git tree hash: c52d4694549ab29673fd85f521eedbb154abdc40
|
|
[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED This pull-request has been approved by: Andreagit97, jasondellaluce, LucaGuerra 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:
Approvers can indicate their approval by writing |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
What type of PR is this?
/kind bug
/kind cleanup
Any specific area of the project related to this PR?
/area libsinsp
Does this PR require a change in the driver versions?
What this PR does / why we need it:
This attempts solving an historical bug in the filtering code area of libsinsp. When using a comparison operator with a field type with which it's not compatible (e.g. doing
fd.num contains 5, wherefd.numis a numeric field on which thecontaineroperator can't be applied), we used to throw an exception only when the filter was evaluated at run-time. This is problematic, because if no event never reaches that specific check for evaluation (due to the boolean expression of the filter), then it becomes totally unpredictable to understand if the check is valid or now -- rather, we'd discover it from an non-deterministic unexpected exception.This PR attempts solving the problem as follows:
filter_compare.cpp, whereas they used to inappropriately be insinsp_filtercheck.cpp. Git blame has been preserved wherever possibleflt_is_comparable_*functions that are invoked for compile-time checking by the sinsp filter compilerI paid extra attention in respecting the type-operator grid currently supported (whether by mistake or intentionally).
Which issue(s) this PR fixes:
Special notes for your reviewer:
Does this PR introduce a user-facing change?: