Hi Martin,

"Words that appear as the name of a dissector/protocol should not be
reported (the script checks for proto_register_protocol() calls and adds
them to the dict)"...
I am not entirely sure it works that way.

In my case:

packet-qcdiag.c
#define PNAME  "Qualcomm Diagnostic"
#define PSNAME "QCDIAG"
#define PFNAME "qcdiag"
...
proto_qcdiag = proto_register_protocol(PNAME, PSNAME, PFNAME);

example "Clang + Code Checks" (passed):
https://gitlab.com/infostam/wireshark/-/jobs/12947400694

epan/dissectors/packet-qcdiag.c 10 / 3922 "packet-qcdiag.c" qcdiag ->  ?
...
epan/dissectors/packet-qcdiag.c 3902 / 3922 "qcdiag.ext_build_id.ver"
qcdiag ->  ?
epan/dissectors/packet-qcdiag.c 3904 / 3922 "qcdiag.ext_build_id.res"
qcdiag ->  ?
epan/dissectors/packet-qcdiag.c 3906 / 3922 "qcdiag.ext_build_id.msm"
qcdiag ->  ?
epan/dissectors/packet-qcdiag.c 3909 / 3922 "qcdiag.ext_build_id.mob_model"
qcdiag ->  ?
epan/dissectors/packet-qcdiag.c 3912 / 3922 "qcdiag.ext_build_id.sw_rev"
qcdiag ->  ?
epan/dissectors/packet-qcdiag.c 3914 / 3922
"qcdiag.ext_build_id.mob_model_str" qcdiag ->  ?
epan/dissectors/packet-qcdiag.c 3915 / 3922 "qcdiag.cmd" qcdiag ->  ?
epan/dissectors/packet-qcdiag.c 3916 / 3922 "QCDIAG Command" QCDIAG ->  ?
epan/dissectors/packet-qcdiag.c 3917 / 3922 "qcdiag.subsys_id" qcdiag ->  ?
epan/dissectors/packet-qcdiag.c 3918 / 3922 "QCDIAG Subsystem" QCDIAG ->  ?

qcdiag : 43

If I add "qcdiag" to wireshark_words.txt, these lines disappear...

What do you think?

I will raise the MRs.

Regards,
Tamas

On Tue, 3 Feb 2026 at 15:37, Martin Mathieson via Wireshark-dev <
[email protected]> wrote:

> Yes, of course. A quick check for where 'len(word)' appears in
> tools/check_spelling.py - I think words < 5 characters won't be reported
> anyway, so some of the ones you mention would be too short.
>
> Words that appear as the name of a dissector/protocol should not be
> reported (the script checks for proto_register_protocol() calls and adds
> them to the dict), although the order that files are checked can obviously
> affect whether or not they have already been loaded.
>
> I see your other email about tools/check_spelling.py next - I was a little
> hasty in making these checking tools use concurrent.futures - the speedup
> is amazing though :)
> Your help in fixing this would be much appreciated.
>
> Martin
>
> On Tue, Feb 3, 2026 at 7:57 AM Tamás Regős <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> Hi Dev Team,
>>
>> Is it OK to submit an MR for updating tools/wireshark_words.txt file with
>> some words?
>>
>> For example: gsm, gsmtap, lte, nr, rrc, umts, wcdma?
>>
>> Regards,
>> Tamas
>> _______________________________________________
>> Wireshark-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
>> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Wireshark-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
> To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
>
_______________________________________________
Wireshark-dev mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]

Reply via email to