Guy Harris skrev 2013-05-11 19:45:
On May 11, 2013, at 7:28 AM, Ambarisha B <b.ambari...@gmail.com> wrote:
I was trying to move the reassembled data from the reassembled_table to
frame_data.
If the pointer to the reassembled data is stored in the per_packet_data
in frame_data the memory usage should work out to be the same or a bit
less as the reassembled hash table wouldn't be needed, right?
Moving stuff to frame_data is something that should only be done as a last
resort if it's being done as part of a project to reduce memory usage. :-)
*Every packet in a capture* has a frame_data structure and, at least in one
test, the memory for frame_data structures was a significant contributor to
Wireshark's memory usage; overall, we want to make that structure *smaller*,
not *bigger.
The key to the reassembled_table is (framenum, ID). I am not able to figure out
what ID is for. In a capture file, frame number itself would be unique,
wouldn't it?
There can be more than one higher-level packet inside a frame (just as a
higher-level packet can require more than one lower-level frame), so, no, the
frame number is not necessarily unique.
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
___________________________________________________________________________
Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org>
Archives: http://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev
Unsubscribe: https://wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev
mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
