No bitmasking necessary - FT_UINT24 takes care of it for you. Just put
0x0 for the bitmask field.
I don't understand this part. Why is bitmask set to 0x instead of doing actually bitmasking while registering headers? I have 3 fields in bits that add up total 24 bits Example : a = 7 bits, b = 14 bits and c= 3 bits. If I don't do bitmask in header files. How can Wireshark decide which fields being display? I did like like below &a....FT_UINT24.......,0xE00000 &b....FT_UINT24.......0x... &c... uint32 3BYTES = tvb_get_leoh(tvb, 3); protocol_add_item(..........,a, offset, 3, TRUE); protocol_add_item(..........,a, offset, 3, TRUE); protocol_add_item(..........,a, offset, 3, TRUE); offset +=3; Is it correct? On 3/12/07, Guy Harris <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Mar 12, 2007, at 4:32 PM, Steven Le wrote: > guint32 is 32 bits --> so type mismatch??? No, no type mismatch. I know of no C implementations on modern machines that support a 24-bit integral data type, so there's no "guint24" type. A 24-bit value fits in 32 bits, so guint32 works fine for the routines to get 24-bit values. However, as Stephen Fisher noted, unless you actually need to look at the value, just use proto_tree_add_item(). _______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
_______________________________________________ Wireshark-dev mailing list [email protected] http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
