Detect unify multi-buffer code #10462
Closed
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
Ticket: 6575 Multi buffers keywords now use a single registration function DetectAppLayerMultiRegister with a GetBuffer argument. This GetBuffer function pointer is similar to the ones used by single-buffer keyword, except that it takes an additional parameter which is the index of the buffer to get. Under the hood, an anonymous union between these 2 functions pointers types is used. In the end, this deduplicates code, especially the calls to DetectEngineContentInspection
|
Information: ERROR: QA failed on SURI_TLPW2_autofp_suri_time.
Pipeline 18633 |
catenacyber
changed the title
|
I notice that Other usages of DetectEngineContentInspection are files, and detect-http-client-body |
This was referenced Apr 18, 2024
|
Rebased in #10897 |
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Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.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.
Link to redmine ticket:
https://redmine.openinfosecfoundation.org/issues/6575
Describe changes:
#10425 with
Preliminary work for #10334