From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (qmail 97341 invoked by alias); 10 Oct 2018 14:06:49 -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 97315 invoked by uid 89); 10 Oct 2018 14:06:48 -0000 Authentication-Results: sourceware.org; auth=none X-Spam-SWARE-Status: No, score=-1.9 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,SPF_HELO_PASS autolearn=ham version=3.3.2 spammy= X-HELO: mx1.redhat.com Received: from mx1.redhat.com (HELO mx1.redhat.com) (209.132.183.28) by sourceware.org (qpsmtpd/0.93/v0.84-503-g423c35a) with ESMTP; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 14:06:47 +0000 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx07.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.22]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 3183D31676B7; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 14:06:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: from blade.nx (ovpn-117-250.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.117.250]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E6B9E106A780; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 14:06:45 +0000 (UTC) Received: by blade.nx (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 19CF480B0905; Wed, 10 Oct 2018 15:06:45 +0100 (BST) Date: Wed, 10 Oct 2018 14:06:00 -0000 From: Gary Benson To: Tom Tromey Cc: gdb-patches@sourceware.org Subject: Re: [PATCH] Add missing va_end found by Coverity Message-ID: <20181010140643.GA11771@blade.nx> References: <1539163961-7279-1-git-send-email-gbenson@redhat.com> <87zhvmdkhp.fsf@tromey.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87zhvmdkhp.fsf@tromey.com> X-IsSubscribed: yes X-SW-Source: 2018-10/txt/msg00256.txt.bz2 Tom Tromey wrote: > >>>>> "Gary" == Gary Benson writes: > > Gary> gdb/ChangeLog: > > Gary> * remote.c (remote_target::remote_send_printf): Add > Gary> missing va_end found by Coverity. > > Thanks, this is ok. Thank you. > FWIW I would have been fine with the obvious rule in this case. Ok, good to know :) Thanks, Gary