From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: jg1.han@samsung.com (Jingoo Han) Date: Tue, 28 Jan 2014 10:36:18 +0900 Subject: [PATCH 2/2] arm64: kernel: use seq_puts() instead of seq_printf() In-Reply-To: <001d01cf1bc9$452569d0$cf703d70$%han@samsung.com> References: <001d01cf1bc9$452569d0$cf703d70$%han@samsung.com> Message-ID: <001f01cf1bc9$57767070$06635150$%han@samsung.com> To: linux-arm-kernel@lists.infradead.org List-Id: linux-arm-kernel.lists.infradead.org For a constant format without additional arguments, use seq_puts() instead of seq_printf(). Also, it fixes the following checkpatch warning. WARNING: Prefer seq_puts to seq_printf Signed-off-by: Jingoo Han --- arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c index c8e9eff..4507691 100644 --- a/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c +++ b/arch/arm64/kernel/setup.c @@ -416,7 +416,7 @@ static int c_show(struct seq_file *m, void *v) seq_printf(m, "%s ", hwcap_str[i]); seq_printf(m, "\nCPU implementer\t: 0x%02x\n", read_cpuid_id() >> 24); - seq_printf(m, "CPU architecture: AArch64\n"); + seq_puts(m, "CPU architecture: AArch64\n"); seq_printf(m, "CPU variant\t: 0x%x\n", (read_cpuid_id() >> 20) & 15); seq_printf(m, "CPU part\t: 0x%03x\n", (read_cpuid_id() >> 4) & 0xfff); seq_printf(m, "CPU revision\t: %d\n", read_cpuid_id() & 15); -- 1.7.10.4