fix: change cloud_cfg to Yaml and modify the source spec

[xiangce]

Signed-off-by: Xiangce Liu [email protected]

All Pull Requests:

Check all that apply:

• Have you followed the guidelines in our Contributing document, including the instructions about commit messages?
• Is this PR to correct an issue?
• Is this PR an enhancement?

Complete Description of Additions/Changes:

• fix: The /etc/cloud/cloud.cfg will be also be filtered, expected content is not collected. #3482
  Change the output of the datasource cloud_cfg to Yaml format to keep compatible with the original file that will also be collected by sosreport
• fix: The cloud_cfg datasource converts the result to json, but it should be yaml. #3478
  Change the source spec to "cloud_cfg_filtered" to avoid it being filtered before the process of datasource
  The filter will be applied to the original spec "cloud_cfg"

[psachin]

If not urgent, I want understand this issue with @crackcodecamp before review.

[bfahr]

@xiangce I'm concerned about this change because I think it might cause confusion between the the specs cloud_cfg which is filtered and cloud_cfg_filtered which is not a filtered spec but uses filters from cloud_cfg. I would say that this spec/parser is actually broken since it currently returns json instead of yaml, and because it does not retain the structure of the config file. Would you consider just fixing the current spec and parser instead of the current approach?

[xiangce]

@bfahr - Thanks for reviewing.

Due to the current filter policy, the original content of the spec will be filtered per the allowlist by force when the spec is marked as filterable=True no matter if it's a legacy spec or datasource spec. This caused issue #3482 and resulted in the parser will never get the expected result specified in the filters, even after issue #3478 is fixed and the returned content is converted to Yaml.
The new added speccloud_cfg_filter is just a workaround, since currently, we cannot adjust the filter policy for datasource specs yet (I think we have discussed this in one of our sync meeting). Does it work if we add adequate comment/docstrings for the usage of the two specs?

[xiangce]

@bfahr - I added some notes for the two specs in the docstring, please have a look.