Remove hard-coded strings by using the str_yes_no() helper function.

Signed-off-by: Thorsten Blum <thorsten.blum@linux.dev>
---
 arch/mips/kernel/proc.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

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) {
@@ -155,7 +155,7 @@ static int show_cpuinfo(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 
 	if (cpu_has_mmips) {
 		seq_printf(m, "micromips kernel\t: %s\n",
-		      (read_c0_config3() & MIPS_CONF3_ISA_OE) ?  "yes" : "no");
+		      str_yes_no(read_c0_config3() & MIPS_CONF3_ISA_OE));
 	}
 
 	seq_puts(m, "Options implemented\t:");
-- 
2.47.0

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

On 3. Nov 2024, at 20:29, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> 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.

What about the comma and newline? Using str_yes_no() would remove them.

Thanks,
Thorsten

On Tue, 5 Nov 2024, Thorsten Blum wrote:

> > I like this cleanup, but now that it matters I suggest restructuring code 
> > such that the latter `seq_printf' is converted as well.
> 
> What about the comma and newline? Using str_yes_no() would remove them.

 This is why a minor code restructuring is needed so that the comma and 
the new line are produced elsewhere (arguably a cleaner structure anyway).

  Maciej

On 5. Nov 2024, at 00:51, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote:
> On Tue, 5 Nov 2024, Thorsten Blum wrote:
>> 
>> What about the comma and newline? Using str_yes_no() would remove them.
> 
> This is why a minor code restructuring is needed so that the comma and 
> the new line are produced elsewhere (arguably a cleaner structure anyway).

Ok, I'll submit a v2.

Thanks,
Thorsten