Wireshark-dev: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Siginificance of pinfo->fd->flags.visited

From: Vishnu Bhatt <vishnu.bhatt@xxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Fri, 10 Jan 2014 15:23:54 +0530

Thanks for the explanation.

 

  1. << The result of a packet dissection is thrown away as soon as the packet has been read and presented, so if you ‘click’ on a new packet the dissection has to be redone.>>

 

“Thrown away” means it’s not stored anywhere. Am I right? If yes, why is it thrown away? And also, few things are done only once using “flags.visited == FALSE”, why then this variable is used, if the previous results are not stored, then everything has to be redone.

 

  1. << Not sure what you are referring to here >>

In packet-rlc.c in epan/dissectors, duplicity of RLC frames is checked, should that be done everytime?

 


From: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Anders Broman
Sent: Friday, January 10, 2014 2:53 PM
To: Developer support list for Wireshark
Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] Siginificance of pinfo->fd->flags.visited

 

 

 

From: wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Vishnu Bhatt
Sent: den 10 januari 2014 08:59
To: wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: [Wireshark-dev] Siginificance of pinfo->fd->flags.visited

 

>Hello all,

> 

>Can anyone please explain me the significance of pinfo->fd->flags.visited. I know that this variable is set to TRUE if a packet has been visited once but if we click on the same packet then why all things are done again?

 

pinfo->fd->flags.visited is FALSE on the first pass when all packets are read in sequence then it’s set to FALSE. The result of a packet dissection is thrown away as soon as the packet has been read and presented, so if you ‘click’ on a new packet the dissection has to be redone.

 

> 

>Logically if a frame has been dissected once, it should not be checked again, so condition “if(pinfo->fd->flags.visited == FALSE)” should always be checked before doing the dissection.

No true see above.

 

>Why the need of re-dissecting >the frame over and over again?

 

See above.

 

>My second doubt is that in RLC, if duplicity has already been checked then why to check it again? I mean should the duplicity function be covered under “if(pinfo->fd->flags.visited == FALSE)”?

 

 

Not sure what you are referring to here…

 

Thanks

Vishnu Bhatt





===============================================================================
Please refer to http://www.aricent.com/legal/email_disclaimer.html
for important disclosures regarding this electronic communication.
===============================================================================





===============================================================================
Please refer to http://www.aricent.com/legal/email_disclaimer.html
for important disclosures regarding this electronic communication.
===============================================================================