Optimization #832: clean up packet action macros - Suricata - Open Information Security Foundation

Actions

Copy link

Optimization #832

closed

clean up packet action macros

Added by Victor Julien almost 11 years ago. Updated almost 11 years ago.

Status:

Closed

Priority:

High

Assignee:

Eric Leblond

Target version:

2.0beta1

Effort:

Difficulty:

Label:

Description

Clean up is need for packet action macro's:

- PASS_PACKET, DROP_PACKET and the others should be wrappers to UPDATE_PACKET_ACTION
- Lets rename things to have PACKET_* prefix, as we use almost everywhere
- Consumers of these macro's should use PASS/DROP/etc macro's directly as much as possible, instead of the UPDATE macro

Subtasks 1 (0 open — 1 closed)

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Eric Leblond almost 11 years ago

Some questions:

Point 2:
So we have
UPDATE_PACKET_ACTION > PACKET_UPDATE_ACTION
DROP_PACKET>PACKET_DROP

Point 3:
Currently, I've choose to use UPDATE_PACKET_ACTION where we add a "|= ACTION". In place with a simple =, I've used direct access to PASS/DROP macros. So the question is. Is there a reason to use |= when setting DROP or PASS ?

Actions

Copy link

Updated by Victor Julien almost 11 years ago

Point 2: ya.

Point 3: we need to review this carefully. For example in case of reject, we also set drop to that we both drop and send out a rst/icmp err. Some actions are obviously conflicting, like pass and drop.

Actions

Copy link