On Mon Aug 4, 2025 at 12:15 AM JST, Miguel Ojeda wrote: > On Sun, Aug 3, 2025 at 3:13 PM Alexandre Courbot <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> We got some interesting feedback on the ACP already. I have been pointed >> to `checked_ilog2` as an equivalent of `last_set_bit`, and it *does* >> indeed work well as a replacement - with the caveat that the name is >> not very natural to me (or anyone familiar with the C interface). Is >> this something we can live with? If we decide to go with the existing >> standard library method, how can we make sure that folks looking for an >> equivalent of `fls` find `checked_ilog2`? > > One option is using the `doc(alias = ...)` attribute, which makes it > appear in the search in the rendered docs, and would show easily in > greps too. > > Another option is simply wrapping it in an `inline(always)`, I guess, > but I think we can just use the upstream ones, unless we want slightly > different semantics.
That would be useful - let's see what the Rust lib folks say, as you brought up that question on the ACP as well. In any case, since we have reasonable alternatives for both `fls` (`checked_ilog2`) and `ffs` (`NonZero::trailing_zeros`), I guess this means we want to use these directly in the kernel and can drop patch 2 of this series?
