[Rework] Breaking: Do not report soft reject in history

We can have much more clear information if we store the real action in
case of `soft-reject`. In this case, we can just imply that a module
that has set this action is an action itself, such as:

* greylist
* ratelimit
* multimap
* antivirus rule name

This policy seems quite reasonable, as `soft reject` has no meaning on
its own.

1 files changed, 19 insertions, 0 deletions

diff --git a/lualib/lua_verdict.lua b/lualib/lua_verdict.lua
index 3ce7e0689..8f3f23ea9 100644
--- a/lualib/lua_verdict.lua
+++ b/lualib/lua_verdict.lua
@@ -186,4 +186,23 @@ exports.describe = function(verdict, what)
   return nil
 end
 
+---[[[
+-- @function lua_verdict.adjust_passthrough_action(task)
+-- If an action is `soft reject` then this function extracts a module that has set this action
+-- and returns an adjusted action (e.g. 'greylist' or 'ratelimit').
+-- Otherwise an action is returned as is.
+--]]
+exports.adjust_passthrough_action = function(task)
+  local action = task:get_metric_action()
+  if action == 'soft reject' then
+    local has_pr,_,_,module = task:has_pre_result()
+
+    if has_pr and module then
+      action = module
+    end
+  end
+
+  return action
+end
+
 return exports
\ No newline at end of file