Re: [PATCH] MIPS: kernel: proc: Use str_yes_no() helper function

[Maciej W. Rozycki]

On Sat, 2 Nov 2024, Thorsten Blum wrote:

> diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/proc.c b/arch/mips/kernel/proc.c
> index 8eba5a1ed664..3e4be48bab02 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/kernel/proc.c
> +++ b/arch/mips/kernel/proc.c
> @@ -66,12 +66,12 @@ static int show_cpuinfo(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
>  	seq_printf(m, "BogoMIPS\t\t: %u.%02u\n",
>  		      cpu_data[n].udelay_val / (500000/HZ),
>  		      (cpu_data[n].udelay_val / (5000/HZ)) % 100);
> -	seq_printf(m, "wait instruction\t: %s\n", cpu_wait ? "yes" : "no");
> +	seq_printf(m, "wait instruction\t: %s\n", str_yes_no(cpu_wait));
>  	seq_printf(m, "microsecond timers\t: %s\n",
> -		      cpu_has_counter ? "yes" : "no");
> +		      str_yes_no(cpu_has_counter));
>  	seq_printf(m, "tlb_entries\t\t: %d\n", cpu_data[n].tlbsize);
>  	seq_printf(m, "extra interrupt vector\t: %s\n",
> -		      cpu_has_divec ? "yes" : "no");
> +		      str_yes_no(cpu_has_divec));
>  	seq_printf(m, "hardware watchpoint\t: %s",
>  		      cpu_has_watch ? "yes, " : "no\n");
>  	if (cpu_has_watch) {

 I like this cleanup, but now that it matters I suggest restructuring code 
such that the latter `seq_printf' is converted as well.

 NB I think there is no need to split the patch into two for such a minor 
change, even though technically these would be two independent updates.

  Maciej