Re: proto_tree_add_item_ret_uint() returns unmasked value - should it?

[Pascal Quantin <pascal.quantin () gmail com>]

2016-07-18 17:44 GMT+02:00 Anders Broman <anders.broman () ericsson com>:

> Hi,
>
> I’m also OK either way but as Pascal says taking the mask into account
> seems more sane.
>
>
>
> How about changing
>
> static void
>
> proto_tree_set_uint(field_info *fi, guint32 value)
>
> to return integer and use that.

proto_tree_set_uint is called too late currently: you have
CHECK_FOR_NULL_TREE and TRY_TO_FAKE_THIS_ITEM calls before.
We might do the masking / shift directly in proto_tree_add_item_ret_uint /
proto_tree_add_item_ret_int / proto_tree_add_bitmask_with_flags_ret_uint64
directly but it means it will be done twice when you have a tree and not
faking items...


> Regards
>
> Anders
>
>
>
> *From:* wireshark-dev-bounces () wireshark org [mailto:
> wireshark-dev-bounces () wireshark org] *On Behalf Of *Pascal Quantin
> *Sent:* den 18 juli 2016 15:40
> *To:* Developer support list for Wireshark <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> *Subject:* Re: [Wireshark-dev] proto_tree_add_item_ret_uint() returns
> unmasked value - should it?
>
>
>
> Hi guys,
>
> I was bugged by the same issue but contrary to Michael, I used the API and
> added the bit shift / masking manually from the output of
> proto_tree_add_item_ret_uint...
>
> So I'm fine doing the change to take the mask into account (It would seem
> saner) but let's coordinate so that we can fix the dissectors accordingly
> (and not introduce new bugs ;) ).
>
> Or we keep the current behavior but add a big warning in the function
> header to make the users aware of this behavior.
>
>
>
> Pascal.
>
>
>
> 2016-07-18 15:04 GMT+02:00 Michael Mann <mmann78 () netscape net>:
>
> I've been wondering that myself, and I'm leaning towards "yes it should"
> because there have been many cases where I couldn't use
> proto_tree_add_item_ret_uint where I wanted to because masks were involved.
>
>
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Anders Broman <anders.broman () ericsson com>
> To: wireshark-dev <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> Sent: Mon, Jul 18, 2016 8:45 am
> Subject: [Wireshark-dev] proto_tree_add_item_ret_uint() returns unmasked
> value - should it?
>
> Hi,
>
> proto_tree_add_item_ret_uint() returns the value corresponding to the
> length of the value fetched e.g uint8, uint16 etc but does not take the
> mask of
>
> the hf entry into consideration which lead to a bug in an proprietary
> dissector I have.
>
> Should it in fact return the value displayed in the corresponding hf
> variable e.g take the mask into consideration?
>
> Regards
>
> Anders
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
> mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
> <wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>              mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org
> ?subject=unsubscribe
>
>
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
> Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
>              mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org
> ?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
Archives:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe