Re: [PATCH v10 loongarch-next 3/3] LoongArch: Replace seq_printf with seq_puts for simple strings

[Huacai Chen]

Hi, Joe,

On Sun, Jan 11, 2026 at 2:04 AM Joe Perches <joe@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Sat, 2026-01-10 at 21:11 +0800, George Guo wrote:
> > Fix warnings like: "Prefer seq_puts to seq_printf" by checkpatch.pl.
> >
> > Replace seq_printf() calls with seq_puts() in show_cpuinfo()
> > when outputting simple constant strings without format specifiers.
> >
> > This improves performance slightly as seq_puts() avoids parsing
> > the format string.
> []
> > diff --git a/arch/loongarch/kernel/proc.c b/arch/loongarch/kernel/proc.c
> []
> > @@ -50,33 +50,49 @@ static int show_cpuinfo(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
> []
> > -     seq_printf(m, "Features\t\t:");
> > -     if (cpu_has_cpucfg)     seq_printf(m, " cpucfg");
> > -     if (cpu_has_lam)        seq_printf(m, " lam");
> [etc]
> > +     seq_puts(m, "Features\t\t:");
> > +     if (cpu_has_cpucfg)
> > +             seq_puts(m, " cpucfg");
> > +     if (cpu_has_lam)
> > +             seq_puts(m, " lam");
>
> trivia:
>
> Not sure this is better style as it's fairly difficult to read.
>
> Maybe a macro might help, something like:
>
> #define seq_cpu_feature(m, feature) \
>         if (cpu_has_##feature) seq_puts(m, " " #feature)
>
>         seq_cpu_feature(m, cpucfg);
>         seq_cpu_feature(m, lam);
Seems just some bikesheedings, the current style is OK at least for
me. Since George has worked on this series for a very long time, let's
stop changing and get it merged.

Huacai

>
> etc.
>