Feat/filter control blocks #20

ElijahSwiftIBM · 2025-12-31T17:39:13Z

💡 Issue Reference

Issue: #5

💻 What does this address?

Control block filtering is a valuable enhancement. In basic cases it allows for simple validation that a control block containing the right data is collected, but in more complex cases, it allows users to grab information on just a singular relevant control block or collection of them in a large table.

📟 Implementation Details

The core control block class now has a new unordered map for filtration that is built on object creation. The filter is passed from block to block along with inclusion patterns and validated along the way. At the "end" of the line, the control block's value is validated against that of the filter. In the event of a match, the json data is returned, otherwise an empty json comes back. Large lists of control blocks like ASCB's and ASSB's were edited to filter out these null values, allowing for a true filter.

📋 Is there a test case?

I added the following tests in both the python and the shell test suites (the names in python are fare more descriptive)

test_cbxp_raises_cbxp_error_if_filter_uses_non_included_control_block
test_cbxp_raises_cbxp_error_if_filter_uses_unknown_key
test_cbxp_raises_cbxp_error_if_filter_dict_wrong_size (python only)
test_cbxp_raises_cbxp_error_if_filter_value_not_string (python only)
test_cbxp_raises_cbxp_error_if_no_filter_match
test_cbxp_can_use_basic_filter
test_cbxp_can_use_include_filter_with_generic_include
test_cbxp_can_use_include_filter_with_discrete_include

* Feature/includeparameter (#14) * Add skeleton for inclusion list parameter Extend interface/skeleton for include_list * Input POinter Attempt to add input pointer parameter for control blocks * Definitions outside of if statements * Attempt to map the intended inclusion list * Try Virtual Function to keep Control Block in Explorer * No longer have get return * Attempt to add the meat of the function -Add methods and members to control blocks to get name of control block, specific control blocks within it, and all control blocks within it -add functions in control block explorer to parse inclusion "map" into actionable data name fix * Update psa.cpp Update psa.cpp * Update cvt.cpp * Update asvt.cpp * algorithm cleanup * better cleanup * Update control_block.cpp * Update main.cpp * Finish addressing merge issues and commit hooks -Minor code updates that were lost in merge commit -Bring new code up to standard for cppcheck -Format new code with clang-format * Update _cbxp.c * Streamline Control Block Explorer Class Update control_block_explorer.hpp * Massive refactor -Shave 2 step process down to one -Change serialized json inclusion map to use a vector of strings still split by "dot" operators * Error Handling Logic * BIG UPDATE PR COMMENTS -Switch pre-processing to one hash map function -use try/catch with custom errors rather than passing return codes everywhere -style and name changes -Enforce more rigid parm structure on entry -Fix some behavioral bugs and oversights in inclusion preprocessing -General streamlining and refactoring of functions, methods, classes, etc. * Another Big Refactor -PR comments (mostly style, but streamlining of error code as well) -Reworked base and derived classes to allow for includables to be defined to the base class and include_map to be defined to the base and derived classes * Update ascb.cpp * Update control_block.hpp * . * .. * ... * PR Comments -ASCB pointer deref in ASVT -Minor name changes -Remove double wildcard error -Add control_block_name_ private member and add initialization to constructor -move include_map_ to protected and remove private using statement * Update asvt.cpp * Update asvt.cpp * PR Comments Mostly renaming things streamlining some unnecessary text, parms and strings * Update control_block.cpp * Update main.cpp * Last round of PR comments string compare with == remove vestiges of old mechanisms for control block management name changes minor tweaks * Update cvt.cpp * Update cvt.cpp * Update cvt.cpp * Final comments Update control_block_explorer.cpp * comments * Last Comments * include changes * Last round of comments * debug * Unit testing (#17) * initial commit 1 * cleaned code before include test cases * wrote test cases, need to check with team now * added space after every function * added .value * shell script done * made changes proposed by leonard 1 * PR changes requested by team * added tests to check for ascb and asvt entries whether it be a string or dict * added tests to check for ascb and asvt entries whether it be a string or dict one more place * made minor tweaks * added updates provided by leonard * grouped failure test cases together * grouped error test cases together * removed extra lines * style changes * Feat/oss housekeeping2 (#18) * Set explicit C/C++ standard and cleanup README. Signed-off-by: Leonard Carcaramo <lcarcaramo@ibm.com> * Update contribution guidelines and functional tests. Signed-off-by: Leonard Carcaramo <lcarcaramo@ibm.com> * Cleanup contribution guidelines and debug debug mode. Signed-off-by: Leonard Carcaramo <lcarcaramo@ibm.com> * Cleanup. Signed-off-by: Leonard Carcaramo <lcarcaramo@ibm.com> * Cleanup. Signed-off-by: Leonard Carcaramo <lcarcaramo@ibm.com> * Fix sdist packaging and pyproject.toml metadata. Signed-off-by: Leonard Carcaramo <lcarcaramo@ibm.com> --------- Signed-off-by: Leonard Carcaramo <lcarcaramo@ibm.com> * Fix _C.pyi and removed unused import from cbxp.py. Signed-off-by: Leonard Carcaramo <lcarcaramo@ibm.com> --------- Signed-off-by: Leonard Carcaramo <lcarcaramo@ibm.com> Co-authored-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@ibm.com> Co-authored-by: Varun Chennamadhava <varunchennamadhava@ibm.com>

lcarcaramo · 2026-01-02T13:09:40Z

DCO signoff seems to be missing on all commits. Maybe consider squashing all of these commits into one commit that has a DCO signoff?

cbxp/main.cpp

cbxp/control_block_explorer.cpp

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.hpp

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

cbxp/main.cpp

tests/test.py

cbxp/control_blocks/ascb.cpp

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

tests/test.sh

cbxp/cbxp.cpp

cbxp/control_block_explorer.cpp

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

tests/test.py

tests/test.sh

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T11:50:46Z

cbxp/cbxp.cpp

-  std::string control_block        = control_block_name;
+  std::string control_block_string = control_block;

  static cbxp_result_t cbxp_result = {nullptr, 0, -1};


A static buffer stack allocated buffer should not be used here. This should be allocated in the heap using new.

https://www.geeksforgeeks.org/cpp/new-and-delete-operators-in-cpp-for-dynamic-memory/

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T11:54:25Z

cbxp/cbxp.cpp

+
+void cbxp_free(cbxp_result_t* cbxp_result) {
+  free(cbxp_result->result_json);
+  free(cbxp_result);


Use delete instead of free(). It is undefined behavior to free memory allocated with new using free().

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T12:15:36Z

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

+      filter_uint = std::stoul(filter_value, nullptr, 0);
+    } catch (...) {
+      Logger::getInstance().debug("'" + filter_value +
+                                  "' cannot be compared to an numeric value");


Change an to a.

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T12:19:36Z

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

-    if (include_map_.find(includable) != include_map_.end()) {
+    if (options_map_.find(includable) != options_map_.end()) {
+      Logger::getInstance().debug("'" + includable +
+                                  "' already in inclusion list.");


"Include list already exists for the '" + includable + "' control block"

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T12:28:16Z

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

      // Build a map of all includables_
-      include_map_[includable] = {};
+      Logger::getInstance().debug(
+          "Creating an entry in the include list for the '" + includable +


"Initializing include list for the '"

Make the same changes for similar messages.

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T12:38:12Z

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

+
+void ControlBlock::createIncludeList(const std::vector<std::string>& includes) {
+  Logger::getInstance().debug("Creating include list for the '" +
                              control_block_name_ + "' control block...");


"Creating include lists for child control blocks to include with the '" + control_block_name_ + "' control block..."

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T12:38:45Z

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

+  return true;
+}
+
+void ControlBlock::createIncludeList(const std::vector<std::string>& includes) {


ControlBlock::createIncludeLists()

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T12:40:36Z

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

  }
-  Logger::getInstance().debug("Done");
+  Logger::getInstance().debug("'" + control_block_name_ +
+                              "' include list has been created");


"Include lists for child control blocks to include with the '" + control_block_name_ + "' control block have been created"

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T12:41:39Z

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

+  ControlBlock::createFilterList(filters);
+}
+
+void ControlBlock::createFilterList(const std::vector<std::string>& filters) {


ControlBlock::createFilterLists()

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T12:44:54Z

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

+
+void ControlBlock::createFilterList(const std::vector<std::string>& filters) {
+  Logger::getInstance().debug("Creating filter list for the '" +
+                              control_block_name_ + "' control block...");


"Creating filter lists for the '" + control_block_name_ "' control block and included child control blocks..."

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T12:46:18Z

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

+    }
+  }
+  Logger::getInstance().debug("'" + control_block_name_ +
+                              "' filter list has been created");


"Filter lists for the '" + control_block_name_ "' control block and included child control blocks have been created"

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T13:06:18Z

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp

+  return true;
+}
+
+void ControlBlock::createIncludeList(const std::vector<std::string>& includes) {


Move Include processing functions before filter processing functions just so the definition of these function follow the same order in which the processing of include patterns and filters is done? Also make sure the order of the functions matches the prototypes defined in the corresponding header file.

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T13:17:25Z

cbxp/python/_cbxp.c

-      "{s:s#, s:i}", "result_json", result->result_json,
-      result->result_json_length, "return_code", result->return_code);
+  result_dictionary = Py_BuildValue("{s:s#, s:i}", "result_json", result_json,
+                                    result_json_length, "return_code", rc);


Looking at the Python C API reference more closely, I actually don't think you need to worry about keeping a copy of the result json string. Py_BuildValue() should copy and convert the C string into a Python str object. In this case, I don't think you need to worry about create a copy of the buffer and using a mutex for serialization. After calling Py_BuildValue(), I think you should be good to call cbxp_free() and then return control to the caller. There is no use after free here because Py_BuildValue() creates a copy of the C string. No need for any static data in this case either since we no longer need static data, which means we don't need a mutex and everything should therefore fully reentrent and thread safe.

https://docs.python.org/3/c-api/arg.html#c.Py_BuildValue

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T13:23:20Z

tests/test.py

+        )
+        self.assertIs(type(cbdata), dict)
+
+    def test_cbxp_can_use_decimal_filter_for_hex_field(self):


can_use_hex_filter_with_equal

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T13:23:23Z

tests/test.py

+        )
+        self.assertIs(type(cbdata), dict)
+
+    def test_cbxp_can_use_hex_filter_with_equal(self):


test_cbxp_can_use_int_filter_with_hex_field_equal

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T13:27:54Z

tests/test.py

            self.assertIs(type(entry), dict)
            self.assertIs(type(entry["ascbassb"]), dict)

+    # ============================================================================


Double check that test function names are consistent and follow the same naming conventions.

Made a slight change but I think it looks good.

lcarcaramo · 2026-02-10T13:37:36Z

tests/test.sh

+run_with_expected_exit_code 255 ./dist/cbxp -f psapsa= psa
+run_with_expected_exit_code 255 ./dist/cbxp -f 'ascbasid<=junk' ascb
+run_with_expected_exit_code 255 ./dist/cbxp -f "psapsa=psa,cvt.asvt.ascb.ascbasid<2" cvt
+


Double check that the shell error tests match the Python error tests. I understand that some of these tests are specific to the shell interface.

After some double checking, I believe this is now the case. There were a couple of tests that were merely performative, but I added a new testing function to test them effectively in this interface.

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

lcarcaramo and others added 2 commits November 6, 2025 07:34

Merge branch 'dev' into feat/filter-control-blocks

17990b6

ElijahSwiftIBM requested review from lcarcaramo and varunchennamadhava December 31, 2025 17:39

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/main.cpp Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/main.cpp Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_block_explorer.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.hpp Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/main.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

tests/test.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

tests/test.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

tests/test.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 2, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_blocks/ascb.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Squashed Commit

954478d

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

ElijahSwiftIBM force-pushed the feat/filter-control-blocks branch from 0d354a7 to 954478d Compare January 6, 2026 20:46

ElijahSwiftIBM added 3 commits January 7, 2026 14:22

change to ensure filter check fails empty lists

1d91795

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

More robust unit testing

1388e38

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

trailing commas in python

a6b42c9

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

tests/test.sh Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/cbxp.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_block_explorer.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Jan 12, 2026

View reviewed changes

tests/test.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Feb 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

tests/test.py Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Feb 6, 2026

View reviewed changes

tests/test.sh Show resolved Hide resolved

ElijahSwiftIBM added 6 commits February 6, 2026 15:53

Include debug statements

00e91b3

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

Fix string filter for int value bug

f3263a6

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

thread safe mechanism changes

3a10f4a

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

thread safe mechanism changes 1.1

001c973

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

thread safe mechanism changes 1.2

285400a

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

thread safe mechanism changes 1.3

d3bbe81

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

lcarcaramo reviewed Feb 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

cbxp/control_blocks/control_block.cpp Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

lcarcaramo reviewed Feb 10, 2026

View reviewed changes

ElijahSwiftIBM added 4 commits February 10, 2026 10:06

thread safe mechanism changes 1.4

155f01d

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

thread safe mechanism changes 1.5

be287ec

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

thread safe mechanism changes 1.6

d788db7

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

thread safe mechanism changes 1.7

2f5b731

Signed-off-by: Elijah Swift <Elijah.Swift@IBM.com>

Feat/filter control blocks #20

Are you sure you want to change the base?

Feat/filter control blocks #20

Uh oh!

Conversation

ElijahSwiftIBM commented Dec 31, 2025

💡 Issue Reference

💻 What does this address?

📟 Implementation Details

📋 Is there a test case?

Uh oh!

lcarcaramo commented Jan 2, 2026

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 • edited Loading Uh oh! There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading

lcarcaramo Feb 10, 2026 •

edited

Loading