On 3/5/07, ronnie sahlberg <ronniesahlberg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Feel free to reverse that change.
It was part of an effort to start refactoring the code so that it
would eventually become possible to multithread wireshark, but the
work required to implement everything required is just too massive to
be realistic.
Instead of just starting to code we should make a list of what's needed
I created http://wiki.wireshark.org/Development/mutithreading listing
the two main tasks I have identified.
Luis
On 3/5/07, Ulf Lamping <ulf.lamping@xxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi!
>
> In an attempt to fix bug 1419 I've stumbled over a strange change that
> Ronnie Sahlberg made in SVN 20251 and I'm asking if there's a reason for
> it that I just don't see.
>
>
> The comment to 20251:
> "break out dfcode from the capture file structure and declare it locally
> where it is needed. allocate and release the dfcode program as needed
> instead of having it hang around in the capture file structure. this
> will ensure that dfcode will not have longer than se scope lifetime in
> case we need that property of it later"
>
>
> The problem with this change: It's calling the line:
>
> dfilter_compile(cf->dfilter, &dfcode);
>
> each time cf_continue_tail() get's called, which takes place when new
> packets are added to the packet list while CAPTURING
> (this update takes place SEVERAL times a second for an "Update list in real
> time" capture).
>
> So we're computing the whole display filter (which might be very long) over
> and over and over again while capturing,
> to avoid some minor memory consumption / allocation problems?!?
>
> That makes packet drops more likely without a good reason!!!
>
>
>
> In addition, I don't see a good reason for this re-compiling at all!
>
> The common sequence for an "Update list in real time" capture will look
> like:
> cf_start_tail
> cf_continue_tail
> cf_continue_tail
> cf_continue_tail
> ...
> cf_continue_tail
> cf_finish_tail
>
> So why not simply dfilter_compile() at cf_start_tail() and dfilter_free() at
> cf_finish_tail() ?!?
>
>
> Regards, ULFL
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wireshark-dev mailing list
> Wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
>
_______________________________________________
Wireshark-dev mailing list
Wireshark-dev@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://www.wireshark.org/mailman/listinfo/wireshark-dev
--
This information is top security. When you have read it, destroy yourself.
-- Marshall McLuhan
