osmocom
/
wireshark
11
0
Fork 1
Code Issues Pull Requests Projects Releases Wiki Activity

Try to fix bug #6208: Status bar count of displayed packets wrong 

When refiltering we process gtk/glib events, so it's possible that cf_continue_tail()
will fire-up, reading new packets and incrementing cf->count.

It's also possible that this packet(s) will pass display filter,
incrementing cf->displayed_count.

But when refiltering we use cf->count as number of packets to process, so
new packets are also processed, incrementing cf->displayed_count second time.

Fix bug by saving cf->count before starting refilter loop.

svn path=/trunk/; revision=45182
This commit is contained in:
Jakub Zawadzki 2012-09-27 20:59:54 +00:00
parent 17fdfce1e6
commit 90c5d4e61b
1 changed files with 6 additions and 4 deletions
Show Stats Download Patch File Download Diff File Expand all files Collapse all files

10
file.c
View File

@ -1776,6 +1776,7 @@ rescan_packets(capture_file *cf, const char *action, const char *action_item,
guint tap_flags;
gboolean add_to_packet_list = FALSE;
gboolean compiled;
guint32 frames_count;
/* Compile the current display filter.
* We assume this will not fail since cf->dfilter is only set in
@ -1864,7 +1865,8 @@ rescan_packets(capture_file *cf, const char *action, const char *action_item,
selected_frame_seen = FALSE;
for (framenum = 1; framenum <= cf->count; framenum++) {
frames_count = cf->count;
for (framenum = 1; framenum <= frames_count; framenum++) {
fdata = frame_data_sequence_find(cf->frames, framenum);
/* Create the progress bar if necessary.
@ -1887,11 +1889,11 @@ rescan_packets(capture_file *cf, const char *action, const char *action_item,
* with count == 0, so let's assert that
*/
g_assert(cf->count > 0);
progbar_val = (gfloat) count / cf->count;
progbar_val = (gfloat) count / frames_count;
if (progbar != NULL) {
g_snprintf(status_str, sizeof(status_str),
"%4u of %u frames", count, cf->count);
"%4u of %u frames", count, frames_count);
update_progress_dlg(progbar, progbar_val, status_str);
}
@ -1980,7 +1982,7 @@ rescan_packets(capture_file *cf, const char *action, const char *action_item,
even though the user requested that the scan stop, and that
would leave the user stuck with an Wireshark grinding on
until it finishes. Should we just stick them with that? */
for (; framenum <= cf->count; framenum++) {
for (; framenum <= frames_count; framenum++) {
fdata = frame_data_sequence_find(cf->frames, framenum);
fdata->flags.visited = 0;
frame_data_cleanup(fdata);