Am Freitag, 25. November 2022, 11:02:21 CET schrieb Lad, Prabhakar: > Hi Heiko, > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 7:58 PM Heiko Stübner <heiko@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > Am Donnerstag, 24. November 2022, 20:52:33 CET schrieb Conor Dooley: > > > On Thu, Nov 24, 2022 at 05:22:01PM +0000, Prabhakar wrote: > > > > From: Lad Prabhakar <prabhakar.mahadev-lad.rj@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > > > > > > > > Introduce ALTERNATIVE_3() macro. > > > > > > Bit perfunctory I think! There's a lovely comment down below that would > > > make for a better commit message if you were to yoink it. > > > Content looks about what I'd expect to see though. > > > > Also both the comment on the original ALTERNATIVE_2 and the new ALTERNATIVE_3 > > should probably be merged into a single comment explaining this once for all > > ALTERNATIVE_x variants. > > > > Especially with the dma stuff, I'm pretty sure we'll get at least an ALTERNATIVE_4 > > if not even more ;-) . So we defnitly don't want to repeat this multiple times. > > > Do agree. How about the below? > > /* > * Similar to what ALTERNATIVE_2() macro does but with an additional > * vendor content. > */ > > So the other ALTERNATIVE_2+() macros will keep on building on it. My idea was more like having _one_ comment block of something like ----- /* * ALTERNATIVE_x macros allow providing multiple replacement options * for an ALTERNATIVE code section. This is helpful if multiple * implementation variants for the same functionality exist for * different cpu cores. * * Usage: * ALTERNATIVE_x(old_content, * new_content1, vendor_id1, errata_id1, CONFIG_k1, * new_content2, vendor_id2, errata_id2, CONFIG_k2, * ... * new_contentx, vendor_idx, errata_idx, CONFIG_kx) */ #define ALTERNATIVE_2(...) #define ALTERNATIVE_3(...) etc ----- So this would include dropping the old comment over ALTERNATIVE2 Heiko
