22/11/2018 19:56, Ananyev, Konstantin: > > Rename rte_bsf64 to rte_bsf64_safe (this is a "safe" version in > > that it prevents undefined behavior by checking if incoming > > parameter is zero) and move it to common header. > > Probably a stupid one: why to rename? > Why just not fix rte_bsf64 to make it work with zero value, > and keep the same function name?
Because there are different parameters and returned value than rte_bsf32. In the next release, we will have rte_bsf64 function, behaving as rte_bsf32. This is explained in the deprecation notice. [...] > > +static inline int > > +rte_bsf64_safe(uint64_t v, uint32_t *pos)
