[Tamás Regős <regost@xxxxxxxxx>]

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 <wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> 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 <regost@xxxxxxxxx> 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 -- wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to wireshark-dev-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

_______________________________________________
Wireshark-dev mailing list -- wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to wireshark-dev-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxx