Re: proto_tree_add_text stats

[Alexis La Goutte <alexis.lagoutte () gmail com>]

Thanks for stats !


On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 2:44 AM, <mmann78 () netscape net> wrote:

>      From the "maybe you were curious, but afraid to ask" file, some
> stats I've collected on proto_tree_add_text calls:
>
> 1292 calls in the dissector directory [1] from 86 files (for an average of
> 15 calls per dissector that have at least one)
> 21 calls outside of the dissector directory, mostly in comments (all
> plugin dissectors have been converted)
>
> There are only 3 dissectors flagged by checkAPIs.pl for "excessive"
> proto_tree_add_text use
> 1. packet-csn1.c (36) .  I've been told this is comparable to asn.1
> dissectors.  It seems to me like hf_ items for proto_tree_add_item should
> be passed into the functions that call proto_tree_add_text, but every time
> I try to figure it out, it just makes my head hurt.  However there are
> sample captures out there (bug 7615 for example) if someone wants to take a
> shot.
> 2. packet-sigcomp.c (211). This was "hiding" in the epan directory outside
> of the dissector directory up until a few months ago.  It doesn't appear to
> be 211 separate fields, just a lot of reuse, but I don't understand enough
> (or can find sample captures) about it to take the plunge.
> convert_proto_tree_add_text.pl could probably be used to lighten the
> load.  If this dissector is removed from the previous stats, the average
> per dissector drops to 12.
> 3. packet-wbxml.c (80).  This appears to be a tvb_parse candidate, but
> I've never seen a sample capture to attempt to make the conversion (and
> learn about tvb_parse in the process)
>
> Outside of those 3, according to checkAPIs.pl [2]
> 1. There are 2 other dissectors that have more than 30 proto_tree_add_text
> calls
> packet-bgp.c (45)
> packet-bssgp.c (32)
>  2. There are 12 dissectors with 20-30 proto_tree_add_text calls
> packet-ansi_801.c
> packet-ansi_a.c
> packet-dcerpc-spoolss.c
> packet-dcerpc.c
> packet-dvbci.c
> packet-gsm_a_rr.c
> packet-mih.c
> packet-q2931.c
> packet-q931.c
> packet-rsvp.c
> packet-rtps.c
> packet-slsk.c
>  3. There are 21 dissectors with <= 5 proto_tree_add_text calls.
> For many of these, I can't match the functionality "exactly" (or how
> fields _should_ be formatted) or when "complicated formatting" (or logic)
> is involved and I don't have a sample capture to verify against.
>
> As you can tell from the commit logs, I work on this in fits and starts,
> but patches are always welcome.  I'll always defer/discard my work in
> progress to someone more familiar with a dissector.
>
>
> [1] This is a simple grep and doesn't take into account comments, ignore
> header files, etc
> [2] I've certainly come across a few cases where checkAPIs.pl results
> don't equal grep (even if you factor out comments), but overall its
> reliable for large numbers of proto_tree_add_text calls
>
> ___________________________________________________________________________
> Sent via:    Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev () wireshark org>
> Archives:    https://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:    https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
             mailto:wireshark-dev-request () wireshark org?subject=unsubscribe