Ethereal-dev: Re: [Ethereal-dev] Back to performance...

Note: This archive is from the project's previous web site, ethereal.com. This list is no longer active.

Date Index Thread Index Other Months All Mailing Lists
Date Prev Date Next Thread Prev Thread Next
From: Ian Schorr <ethereal@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 22:38:14 -0400
Is there any reason why gtk/rpc_progs.c, gtk/h225_ras_srt.c, and gtk/h225_counter.c use reddisect_packets() instead of retap_packets()? Noting the comment in h225_ras_srt.c, it appears someone's already made this observation about one of these files (I'm guessing Guy =). 

If there's no good reason can we change them please?

Thanks,
Ian

On Jul 23, 2004, at 7:46 PM, Guy Harris wrote:


Ian Schorr said:

In the other direction, is there any reason that the packet list needs
to be rebuilt every time a new tap listener is added or changed in some 
way?


Definitely not, at least in some cases, which is why I created
"retap_packets()" and made the tap code use it in some places - it doesn't rebuild the packet list, it just redissects the packets (and doesn't even 
bother building the protocol tree if there are no tap filters).