Speed up category lookup in ndpi_get_category_id()

[0xA50C1A1]

Please sign (check) the below before submitting the Pull Request:

• I have signed the ntop Contributor License Agreement at https://github.com/ntop/legal/blob/main/individual-contributor-licence-agreement.md
• I have read the contributing guidelines at https://github.com/ntop/nDPI/blob/dev/CONTRIBUTING.md
• I have updated the documentation (in doc/) to reflect the changes made (if applicable)

Describe changes:

• Implements same optimization pattern as Speed up protocol lookup in ndpi_get_proto_by_name #2867
• No behavior changes, just faster lookup

Note: This replaces unnecessary PR #2868 - apologies for the duplicate effort.

[sonarqubecloud]

Quality Gate passed

Issues
0 New issues
0 Accepted issues

Measures
0 Security Hotspots
0.0% Coverage on New Code
0.0% Duplication on New Code

See analysis details on SonarQube Cloud

[0xA50C1A1]

@IvanNardi, I'm considering adding ndpi_get_breed_by_name() and modifying ndpi_get_proto_breed_name() to match ndpi_get_proto_name:

char* ndpi_get_proto_breed_name(struct ndpi_detection_module_struct *mod, ndpi_protocol_breed_t breed_id);

Would this API change be acceptable?

[IvanNardi]

@IvanNardi, I'm considering adding ndpi_get_breed_by_name() and modifying ndpi_get_proto_breed_name() to match ndpi_get_proto_name:

char* ndpi_get_proto_breed_name(struct ndpi_detection_module_struct *mod, ndpi_protocol_breed_t breed_id);

Would this API change be acceptable?

How exactly are you going to use the (new) first parameter?

[0xA50C1A1]

@IvanNardi, I'm considering adding ndpi_get_breed_by_name() and modifying ndpi_get_proto_breed_name() to match ndpi_get_proto_name:

char* ndpi_get_proto_breed_name(struct ndpi_detection_module_struct *mod, ndpi_protocol_breed_t breed_id);

Would this API change be acceptable?

How exactly are you going to use the (new) first parameter?

Actually, never mind – I was just considering moving the breed names to a static array (similar to how categories are handled) and unifying the function signature for consistency. I guess there's not much point in that.

[IvanNardi]

As you prefer

…

On Thu, Jun 5, 2025, 15:00 Vladimir Gavrilov ***@***.***> wrote: *0xA50C1A1* left a comment (ntop/nDPI#2869) <#2869 (comment)> @IvanNardi <https://github.com/IvanNardi>, I'm considering adding ndpi_get_breed_by_name() and modifying ndpi_get_proto_breed_name() to match ndpi_get_proto_name: char* ndpi_get_proto_breed_name(struct ndpi_detection_module_struct *mod, ndpi_protocol_breed_t breed_id); Would this API change be acceptable? How exactly are you going to use the (new) first parameter? Actually, never mind – I was just considering moving the breed names to a static array (similar to how categories are handled) and unifying the function signature for consistency. I guess there's not much point in that. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#2869 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/ADBD4J6UGFFJVKXNAAMP2HL3CA5ORAVCNFSM6AAAAAB6VH5ZNCVHI2DSMVQWIX3LMV43OSLTON2WKQ3PNVWWK3TUHMZDSNBUGE4TOMRZGY> . You are receiving this because you were mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>