Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: BItfields Larger than 32 Bits
From: Jakub Zawadzki <darkjames-ws () darkjames pl>
Date: Thu, 15 May 2014 09:26:21 +0200
Hi, On Tue, May 13, 2014 at 02:19:51PM -0400, Kevin Cox wrote:
I was attempting to dissect a 64 bit bitfield and was wondering what the best/preferred method was. I saw a question on ask.wireshark.org[0] which had a single answer the said to use a text field. [0] http://ask.wireshark.org/questions/20599/dissecting-bitfields-larger-than-32-bits I was wondering if there is a better way to do this.
Could you check proto_tree_add_split_bits_item_ret_val()? It looks someone had already this problem. Cheers, Jakub. ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
Current thread:
- BItfields Larger than 32 Bits Kevin Cox (May 13)
- Re: BItfields Larger than 32 Bits Alexis La Goutte (May 13)
- Re: BItfields Larger than 32 Bits Kevin Cox (May 13)
- Re: BItfields Larger than 32 Bits Michal Labedzki (May 14)
- Re: BItfields Larger than 32 Bits Shanks, Graham (UK) (May 14)
- Re: BItfields Larger than 32 Bits Michal Labedzki (May 14)
- Re: BItfields Larger than 32 Bits Kevin Cox (May 13)
- Re: BItfields Larger than 32 Bits Alexis La Goutte (May 13)