From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 1277 invoked by alias); 9 Aug 2018 18:08:44 -0000 Mailing-List: contact gdb-patches-help@sourceware.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Id: List-Subscribe: List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: , Sender: gdb-patches-owner@sourceware.org Received: (qmail 1256 invoked by uid 89); 9 Aug 2018 18:08:43 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-11.8 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_00,GIT_PATCH_2,GIT_PATCH_3,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy=H*M:184f X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx3-rdu2.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (66.187.233.73) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Thu, 09 Aug 2018 18:08:42 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx05.intmail.prod.int.rdu2.redhat.com [10.11.54.5]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id F3A0B40201A3; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 18:08:40 +0000 (UTC) Received: from [127.0.0.1] (ovpn04.gateway.prod.ext.ams2.redhat.com [10.39.146.4]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 772B123155; Thu, 9 Aug 2018 18:08:40 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [PATCH 3/7] Avoid -Wnarrowing warnings in struct tramp_frame instances To: Tom Tromey , gdb-patches@sourceware.org References: <20180808232016.12777-1-tom@tromey.com> <20180808232016.12777-4-tom@tromey.com> From: Pedro Alves Message-ID: <1dc16fd5-381b-fa3e-184f-1a54aac01529@redhat.com> Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2018 18:08:00 -0000 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <20180808232016.12777-4-tom@tromey.com> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-SW-Source: 2018-08/txt/msg00225.txt.bz2 On 08/09/2018 12:20 AM, Tom Tromey wrote: > --- a/gdb/common/common-types.h > +++ b/gdb/common/common-types.h > @@ -58,6 +58,9 @@ typedef unsigned long long ULONGEST; > /* * The largest CORE_ADDR value. */ > #define CORE_ADDR_MAX (~ (CORE_ADDR) 0) > > +/* * The largest ULONGEST value. */ > +#define ULONGEST_MAX (~ (ULONGEST) 0) With '~' being a unary operator, the right format would be: #define ULONGEST_MAX (~(ULONGEST) 0) But I see that CORE_ADDR_MAX has the same issue... LGTM. Thanks, Pedro Alves