[Rspamd-Users] errno as HTTP Error code

[Vsevolod Stakhov]

On 08/03/2021 19:47, Steve Sturges (ststurge) via Users wrote:
> Hi all-
> 
> Looking at rspamd 2.7 and I was trying to track down a recent issue where I got an unexpected HTTP error code back from rspamd's HTTP API when redis was having issues. Trying to trace this back from the messages in rspamd.log, I have a question about the use of errno in this code:
> 
> static void
> rspamd_http_event_handler (int fd, short what, gpointer ud)
> {
> ...
>         else if (r == 0) {
>             /* We can still call http parser */
>             http_parser_execute (&priv->parser, &priv->parser_cb, d, r);
> 
>             if (!conn->finished) {
>                 err = g_error_new (HTTP_ERROR,
>                         errno,
>                         "IO read error: unexpected EOF");
>                 conn->error_handler (conn, err);
>                 g_error_free (err);
>             }
>             REF_RELEASE (pbuf);
>             rspamd_http_connection_unref (conn);
> 
>             return;
>         }
>         else {
>             if (!priv->ssl) {
>                 err = g_error_new (HTTP_ERROR,
>                         errno,
>                         "IO read error: %s",
>                         strerror (errno));
>                 conn->error_handler (conn, err);
>                 g_error_free (err);
>             }
> 
>             REF_RELEASE (pbuf);
>             rspamd_http_connection_unref (conn);
> 
>             return;
>         }
>     }
> ...
> 
> 
> In other areas of this function, g_error_new is invoked with a specific HTTP error code — for example, 413, 400, 500 (500 + internal parser errno).  In the case above, where it is using errno directly that then becomes the actual HTTP code in the HTTP response generated in rspamd_http_router_error_handler().  There are other cases as well, farther down in the function above that use ETIMEDOUT directly.
> 
> Should those errno values should be mapped to HTTP response codes, probably 503 or perhaps 408 or 504?
> 
> Cheers
> -steve
> 

Yes, that should be fixed, thanks.