On Wed, May 16, 2018 at 8:01 AM, Richard Sharpe
<realrichardsharpe@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> I am seeing something weird with proto_tree_add_bits_item, although it
> could be my misunderstanding as well.
>
> Attached are two screen shots showing the dissected field and the byte view.
>
> The code:
> --------
> static void
> dissect_a_control_bsr(proto_tree *tree, tvbuff_t *tvb, int offset,
> guint32 bits _U_, guint32 start_bit)
> {
> start_bit += offset * 8;
> proto_tree_add_bits_item(tree, hf_ieee80211_he_bsr_aci_bitmap, tvb,
> start_bit, 4, ENC_LITTLE_ENDIAN);
> proto_tree_add_bits_item(tree, hf_ieee80211_he_bsr_delta_tid, tvb,
> start_bit + 4, 2, ENC_LITTLE_ENDIAN);
> proto_tree_add_bits_item(tree, hf_ieee80211_he_bsr_aci_high, tvb,
> start_bit + 6, 2, ENC_LITTLE_ENDIAN);
> proto_tree_add_bits_item(tree, hf_ieee80211_he_bsr_scaling_factor, tvb,
> start_bit + 8, 2, ENC_LITTLE_ENDIAN);
> --------------
>
> is dealing with a field that contains 0x8f 0xb0 0x00 0x08.
>
> The first (always counting from the RHE) six bits (0b001111 from 0x8f)
> are the HTC+ control bits (2 bits) and the Aggregate control field
> bits (4 bits). These are being dissected correctly as HTC+ = 0x3 and
> A-Control as 0x3 as well.
>
> The next four bits are the ACI Bitmap, and they should be 0b0010 but
> they are displaying as 0b1110 as if the bottom two bits of the 0xb
> from 0xb0 were being grabbed rather than the bottom two bits of 0x0,
>
> I hope this is making sense. I guess I need to look more closely at
> the code in decode_bits_in_field.
I came across this in _tvb_get_bits64:
/* get bits from any partial octet at the tail */
if(remaining_bit_length)
{
value <<= remaining_bit_length;
value += (tvb_get_guint8(tvb, octet_offset) >>
(8 - remaining_bit_length));
}
}
That would seem to take the top bits from the next byte but that seems
incorrect from the point of view of many uses.
--
Regards,
Richard Sharpe
(何以解憂？唯有杜康。--曹操)(传说杜康是酒的发明者)
