Re: [PATCH v2 10/11] x86/alternatives: Simplify ALTERNATIVE_n()

[Peter Zijlstra]

On Wed, Sep 13, 2023 at 04:38:47PM +0200, Borislav Petkov wrote:

>   [ bp: Make labels unique and thus all sizing use unambiguous labels.
>     Add more info. ]

> +#define __ALTERNATIVE(oldinstr, newinstr, ft_flags, n)			\
> +	OLDINSTR(oldinstr, n)						\
> +	ALTINSTR_ENTRY(ft_flags)					\
> +	ALTINSTR_REPLACEMENT(newinstr)

> +#define ALTERNATIVE_2(oldinst, newinst1, flag1, newinst2, flag2)	\
> +	__ALTERNATIVE(ALTERNATIVE(oldinst, newinst1, flag1),		\
> +		    newinst2, flag2, 1)

> +#define ALTERNATIVE_3(oldinst, newinst1, flag1, newinst2, flag2,	\
> +		      newinst3, flag3)					\
> +	__ALTERNATIVE(ALTERNATIVE_2(oldinst, newinst1, flag1, newinst2, flag2), \
> +		    newinst3, flag3, 2)


So I see what you did with that @n argument, but urgh, do we really need
this? I mean, it just makes things harder to use and it doesn't actually
fix anything.. :/