Re: [XEN PATCH][for-4.19 v3 1/8] xen/include: add macro LOWEST_BIT

[Nicola Vetrini <nicola.vetrini@bugseng.com>]

On 26/10/2023 08:52, Jan Beulich wrote:
> On 26.10.2023 00:38, Stefano Stabellini wrote:
>> On Wed, 25 Oct 2023, Jan Beulich wrote:
>>> On 25.10.2023 16:50, Nicola Vetrini wrote:
>>>> Ok, I'll send a revised version using MASK_LOWEST_BIT, taking into
>>>> account also the
>>>> other comments about the explanation on the macro definition
>>>> (which some IDEs even show when hovering on its usage, which could
>>>> partially address
>>>> the latter concern).
>>> 
>>> You're of course free to do so, but since - as indicated before -
>>> MASK_LOWEST_BIT() imo isn't a better name than LOWEST_BIT(), I'll
>>> continue to object.
>> 
>> Jan if you are OK with that I'll ask Julien to break the tie and pick
>> the name to use. Julien can you please help us move forward?
> 
> Hmm, I'm having trouble seeing us at the point of breaking ties yet.
> First we need naming suggestions which actually unambiguously
> describe what's being done by the macro. I gave one suggestion which
> I think fulfills this property, but is a little too long for my
> taste. I gave another suggestion with a far-off but shorter name,
> which I can appreciate isn't liked. I've not seen other suggestions
> fulfilling this base criteria.
> 
> Jan

Any name is fine with me. ISOLATE_LOW_BIT may be longish, but the macro 
would be used
in just a few places for a specific reason, so the loss in readability 
is probably not
that high.

-- 
Nicola Vetrini, BSc
Software Engineer, BUGSENG srl (https://bugseng.com)