Hi,
On Mon, Dec 16, 2013 at 05:48:12PM +0100, Martin Kaiser wrote:
> is it allowed to add an FT_BYTES hf entry with len==0 to the protocol
> tree?
>
> E.g.
>
> proto_tree_add_bytes_format_value(tree, hf_myproto_myval,
> tvb, offset, 0, NULL, format, ...)
>
> The idea would be to allow filtering for this element although it has no
> value (it's just there).
>
> When I do this, I run into an assert in proto_custom_set(),
>
> case FT_BYTES:
> bytes = (guint8 *)fvalue_get(&finfo->value);
> ... bytes_to_string(bytes, ...) -> DISSECTOR_ASSERT
>
>
> Who's at fault here: proto_custom_set() or the caller?
proto_item_fill_label() allows empty bytes:
5389 case FT_BYTES:
5390 case FT_UINT_BYTES:
5391 bytes = (guint8 *)fvalue_get(&fi->value);
5392 label_fill(label_str, 0, hfinfo,
5393 (bytes) ? bytes_to_str(bytes, fvalue_length(&fi->value)) : "<MISSING>");
5394 break;
It'd be good to make them consistent, allow empty bytes (+1 from me) or assert in both place.
The check in proto_item_fill_label() is almost from begining (r1979).
Kuba.
