On 31.10.2016 17:02, Pascal Quantin wrote:
> Looks like no one is currently working on it (or at least no patch is
> queued in Gerrit yet). As you seem to be the fist user of those functions
> with 64bits fields, you are probably a good candidate to submit a patch as
> you can easily test it ;)
> 64 bits variant should make use of the hf_try_val64_to_str_const(),
> *custom_fmt_func_64_t() and hfinfo_number_value_format64() functions.
It's not clear of how to use the bitmask in the readme documentation.
In my opinion, it looks best when the fields of the bitmask tree have
the same number of bits as the main headerfield. If the main hf has
FT_UINT64 and I add fields with FT_INT16 as Guy mentioned, then you
can't see the position of the values (see attached example).
But with the changes I've made to the proto_item_add_bitmask_tree()
function, if you are using a type greater that FT_UINT40/FT_INT40, then
you must use val64_string, even if you value for you value_string has
only 1 byte.
But I could check the display flags for BASE_VAL64_STRING and decide
which one to use. I think it's the best way to prevent it from affecting
dissectors which don't use always val64_string.
Any opinions?
--
Thomas
Attachment:
bitmask64bit-ft_int16.png
Description: PNG image
