From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:54644)
	by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lersek@redhat.com>) id 1Seo9E-00048z-5m
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 10:02:21 -0400
Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lersek@redhat.com>) id 1Seo9C-0001wz-B1
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 10:02:11 -0400
Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([209.132.183.28]:34151)
	by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71)
	(envelope-from <lersek@redhat.com>) id 1Seo9C-0001uY-2z
	for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 10:02:10 -0400
Received: from int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com
	(int-mx02.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.12])
	by mx1.redhat.com (8.14.4/8.14.4) with ESMTP id q5DE28BI015701
	(version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=OK)
	for <qemu-devel@nongnu.org>; Wed, 13 Jun 2012 10:02:08 -0400
Message-ID: <4FD89DA3.7040002@redhat.com>
Date: Wed, 13 Jun 2012 16:03:15 +0200
From: Laszlo Ersek <lersek@redhat.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
References: <1339575768-2557-1-git-send-email-lersek@redhat.com>
	<1339575768-2557-6-git-send-email-lersek@redhat.com>
	<4FD8705C.2010503@redhat.com>
In-Reply-To: <4FD8705C.2010503@redhat.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-15
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] [PATCH v2 05/17] qapi: introduce OptsVisitor
List-Id: <qemu-devel.nongnu.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/options/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://lists.nongnu.org/archive/html/qemu-devel>
List-Post: <mailto:qemu-devel@nongnu.org>
List-Help: <mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/listinfo/qemu-devel>,
	<mailto:qemu-devel-request@nongnu.org?subject=subscribe>
To: Paolo Bonzini <pbonzini@redhat.com>
Cc: qemu-devel@nongnu.org

On 06/13/12 12:50, Paolo Bonzini wrote:
> Il 13/06/2012 10:22, Laszlo Ersek ha scritto:
>> +static void
>> +opts_type_uint64(Visitor *v, uint64_t *obj, const char *name, Error **errp)
>> +{
>> +    OptsVisitor *ov = DO_UPCAST(OptsVisitor, visitor, v);
>> +    const QemuOpt *opt;
>> +    const char *str;
>> +
>> +    opt = lookup_scalar(ov, name, errp);
>> +    if (!opt) {
>> +        return;
>> +    }
>> +
>> +    str = opt->str;
>> +    if (str != NULL) {
>> +        while (isspace((unsigned char)*str)) {
>> +            ++str;
>> +        }
>> +
>> +        if (*str != '-' && *str != '\0') {
>> +            unsigned long long val;
>> +            char *endptr;
>> +
>> +            /* non-empty, non-negative subject sequence */
>> +            errno = 0;
>> +            val = strtoull(str, &endptr, 0);
>> +            if (*endptr == '\0' && errno == 0 && val <= UINT64_MAX) {
> 
> I would have expected a warning from GCC here, but obviously that's not
> the case?

Right, same surprise here. Maybe gcc has seen the light and it realizes
now "long long" can be wider than 64 bits, theoretically.

Thanks for the review!
Laszlo