FYI this migration has now begun. Going forward, please use pinfo->pool instead of wmem_packet_scope() in new code when possible. And if anybody has some time, there are lots of existing dissectors left to convert. I expect most of them to be pretty straightforward, just adding pinfo to a few more method signatures as needed.
Thanks, Evan On Mon, Jul 12, 2021 at 11:52 Evan Huus <eapa...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've been thinking recently about starting the process of getting rid > of the "global" wmem scope methods (wmem_packet_scope, > wmem_file_scope, etc) in favour of passing them around in arguments > (or in pinfo, or something). This would let us drop a bunch of > in-scope/out-of-scope tracking and assertion, as well as make the code > more amenable to future refactors like (potentially) concurrency. > > At a first glance, we already have pinfo->pool which maintains the > lifetime of the packet_info object. As far as I can reason, this is > almost/effectively the same as the existing wmem_packet_scope - it > gets cleaned up later in the dissection flow, but there's still only > ever one which gets reused for each packet. > > Is this correct? If so, does it make sense to start replacing > `wmem_packet_scope()` calls with `pinfo->pool` when pinfo is already > in scope? > > Thanks, > Evan >
___________________________________________________________________________ Sent via: Wireshark-dev mailing list <wireshark-dev@wireshark.org> Archives: https://www.wireshark.org/lists/wireshark-dev Unsubscribe: https://www.wireshark.org/mailman/options/wireshark-dev mailto:wireshark-dev-requ...@wireshark.org?subject=unsubscribe
