On 12.09.19 14:08, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.09.2019 13:53, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 12.09.19 13:46, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.09.2019 13:17, Juergen Gross wrote:
On 12.09.19 12:04, Jan Beulich wrote:
On 12.09.2019 11:34, Juergen Gross wrote:
Okayy, I'll rename "cpu" to "my_cpu".
We've got a number of instances of "this_cpu" in such cases already,
but no single "my_cpu". May I suggest to stick to this naming here
as well?
Hmm, don't you think adding further overloading of "this_cpu" is a bad
idea?
Not at all, no. A function-like macro and a variable of the same
name will happily coexist.
I am aware that this is working correctly.
I just think such overloading isn't helping for readability and ease
of modification.
In the end I'm not feeling strong here, so in case there are no
objections I'll go with this_cpu.
Okay, so let's consider another alternative: cur_cpu? What I
Yes, I like that one better. :-)
sincerely dislike are identifiers of the my_* form, for being
apparently common in absolute beginner examples.
We should try to avoid that, yes. :-D
Amazing - there is no my_* identifier in the hypervisor yet.
Juergen
_______________________________________________
Xen-devel mailing list
Xen-devel@lists.xenproject.org
https://lists.xenproject.org/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel
