Wireshark mailing list archives
Re: displaying more than 32 bits
From: "Yosi Saggi" <yosis () designartnetworks com>
Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2011 09:32:07 +0200
I have debugged the variables. The f2_val, which is 64 bits has the correct value in the correct order. There is no problem there. My problem is how to display the different groups of bits. For example, when I had a variable that was 32 bits there was no problem displaying it with "proto_tree_add_item" function, when my hf variable has a bitmask that groups the wanted bits. The display looks something like this: 1... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... = Group A: 1 .0.. .... .... .... .... .... .... .... = Group B: 0 ..01 1101 1011 0... .... .... .... .... = Group C: 950 And so on. How and with what functions can I work when using more than 32 bits? That is what I'm looking for. Yosi -----Original Message----- From: wireshark-dev-bounces () wireshark org [mailto:wireshark-dev-bounces () wireshark org] On Behalf Of Andreas Sent: Sunday, March 06, 2011 9:32 PM To: wireshark-dev () wireshark org Subject: Re: [Wireshark-dev] displaying more than 32 bits Am 06.03.2011 15:50, schrieb Yosi Saggi:
Hi everybody I have a payload that its size is 42 bits. I am getting it from the
TVB
in little Endian. I have no problem displaying the whole payload as big endian with a guint 64bit variable: guint32 f2_val1, f2_val2; guint64 f2_val; f2_val1 = tvb_get_letohl(tvb, *plen) f2_val2 = tvb_get_letohl(tvb, (*plen+4)); f2_val = f2_val1; f2_val= (f2_val<<32); f2_val = f2_val|f2_val2;
Are threr any suggestions what can I use to display it correctly. As I have seen that "proto_tree_add_bits_ret_val", although having a "big endian/little endian" operand, that "little endian" is not implemented yet.
If you have a big endian number, than the high part should be *plen, the lower part (*plen)+4 not (*plen+4). The latter is plen[4]. suggestions: - Check the (*plen+4) term. - Check that your 32 bit variables have the expected values. - Check your variable names ;-) I got confused while trying to reproduce it since with the names f2_val and f2_val2. If the code above is not literally from your dissector but "simplified" you probably also have done this failure. -- Andy ________________________________________________________________________ ___ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe ___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org> Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe
Current thread:
- displaying more than 32 bits Yosi Saggi (Mar 06)
- Re: Spam: displaying more than 32 bits Yosi Saggi (Mar 06)
- Re: Spam: displaying more than 32 bits Yosi Saggi (Mar 06)
- Re: displaying more than 32 bits Andreas (Mar 06)
- Re: displaying more than 32 bits Yosi Saggi (Mar 06)
- Re: displaying more than 32 bits Chris Maynard (Mar 07)
- Re: Spam: displaying more than 32 bits Yosi Saggi (Mar 06)