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.

Signed-off-by: George Guo <guodongtai@kylinos.cn>
---
 arch/loongarch/kernel/proc.c | 64 ++++++++++++++++++++++--------------
 1 file changed, 40 insertions(+), 24 deletions(-)

diff --git a/arch/loongarch/kernel/proc.c b/arch/loongarch/kernel/proc.c
index a60471b96440..a8127e83da65 100644
--- 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, "Address Sizes\t\t: %d bits physical, %d bits virtual\n",
 		      cpu_pabits + 1, cpu_vabits + 1);
 
-	seq_printf(m, "ISA\t\t\t:");
+	seq_puts(m, "ISA\t\t\t:");
 	if (isa & LOONGARCH_CPU_ISA_LA32R)
-		seq_printf(m, " loongarch32r");
+		seq_puts(m, " loongarch32r");
 	if (isa & LOONGARCH_CPU_ISA_LA32S)
-		seq_printf(m, " loongarch32s");
+		seq_puts(m, " loongarch32s");
 	if (isa & LOONGARCH_CPU_ISA_LA64)
-		seq_printf(m, " loongarch64");
-	seq_printf(m, "\n");
+		seq_puts(m, " loongarch64");
+	seq_puts(m, "\n");
 
-	seq_printf(m, "Features\t\t:");
-	if (cpu_has_cpucfg)	seq_printf(m, " cpucfg");
-	if (cpu_has_lam)	seq_printf(m, " lam");
-	if (cpu_has_scq)	seq_printf(m, " scq");
-	if (cpu_has_ual)	seq_printf(m, " ual");
-	if (cpu_has_fpu)	seq_printf(m, " fpu");
-	if (cpu_has_lsx)	seq_printf(m, " lsx");
-	if (cpu_has_lasx)	seq_printf(m, " lasx");
-	if (cpu_has_crc32)	seq_printf(m, " crc32");
-	if (cpu_has_complex)	seq_printf(m, " complex");
-	if (cpu_has_crypto)	seq_printf(m, " crypto");
-	if (cpu_has_ptw)	seq_printf(m, " ptw");
-	if (cpu_has_lspw)	seq_printf(m, " lspw");
-	if (cpu_has_lvz)	seq_printf(m, " lvz");
-	if (cpu_has_lbt_x86)	seq_printf(m, " lbt_x86");
-	if (cpu_has_lbt_arm)	seq_printf(m, " lbt_arm");
-	if (cpu_has_lbt_mips)	seq_printf(m, " lbt_mips");
-	seq_printf(m, "\n");
+	seq_puts(m, "Features\t\t:");
+	if (cpu_has_cpucfg)
+		seq_puts(m, " cpucfg");
+	if (cpu_has_lam)
+		seq_puts(m, " lam");
+	if (cpu_has_scq)
+		seq_puts(m, " scq");
+	if (cpu_has_ual)
+		seq_puts(m, " ual");
+	if (cpu_has_fpu)
+		seq_puts(m, " fpu");
+	if (cpu_has_lsx)
+		seq_puts(m, " lsx");
+	if (cpu_has_lasx)
+		seq_puts(m, " lasx");
+	if (cpu_has_crc32)
+		seq_puts(m, " crc32");
+	if (cpu_has_complex)
+		seq_puts(m, " complex");
+	if (cpu_has_crypto)
+		seq_puts(m, " crypto");
+	if (cpu_has_ptw)
+		seq_puts(m, " ptw");
+	if (cpu_has_lspw)
+		seq_puts(m, " lspw");
+	if (cpu_has_lvz)
+		seq_puts(m, " lvz");
+	if (cpu_has_lbt_x86)
+		seq_puts(m, " lbt_x86");
+	if (cpu_has_lbt_arm)
+		seq_puts(m, " lbt_arm");
+	if (cpu_has_lbt_mips)
+		seq_puts(m, " lbt_mips");
+	seq_puts(m, "\n");
 
 	seq_printf(m, "Hardware Watchpoint\t: %s", str_yes_no(cpu_has_watch));
 	if (cpu_has_watch) {
@@ -84,7 +100,7 @@ static int show_cpuinfo(struct seq_file *m, void *v)
 		      cpu_data[n].watch_ireg_count, cpu_data[n].watch_dreg_count);
 	}
 
-	seq_printf(m, "\n\n");
+	seq_puts(m, "\n\n");
 
 	return 0;
 }
-- 
2.49.0

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);

etc.

Hi, Joe,

On Sun, Jan 11, 2026 at 2:04 AM Joe Perches <joe@perches.com> 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.
>