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 <[email protected]>: > 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 <[email protected]> > To: wireshark-dev <[email protected]> > 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 <[email protected]> > Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev > Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev > mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe > <[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe> > > ___________________________________________________________________________ > Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> > Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev > Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev > mailto:[email protected] > ?subject=unsubscribe >
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <[email protected]> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:[email protected]?subject=unsubscribe
