On 01/20/2015 11:42 PM, Maciej W. Rozycki wrote: > On Fri, 16 Jan 2015, Markos Chandras wrote: > >> Print 'mips64r6' and/or 'mips32r6' if the kernel is running on >> a MIPS R6 core. >> >> Signed-off-by: Markos Chandras <markos.chandras@xxxxxxxxxx> >> --- >> arch/mips/kernel/proc.c | 8 +++++++- >> 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-) >> >> diff --git a/arch/mips/kernel/proc.c b/arch/mips/kernel/proc.c >> index 097fc8d14e42..a8fdf9685cad 100644 >> --- a/arch/mips/kernel/proc.c >> +++ b/arch/mips/kernel/proc.c >> @@ -82,7 +82,9 @@ static int show_cpuinfo(struct seq_file *m, void *v) >> seq_printf(m, "]\n"); >> } >> >> - seq_printf(m, "isa\t\t\t: mips1"); >> + seq_printf(m, "isa\t\t\t:"); >> + if (!cpu_has_mips_r6) >> + seq_printf(m, " mips1"); > > I think define `cpu_has_mips_r1' instead and use it here. It may turn > out needed elsewhere too. We probably don't need a new `MIPS_CPU_ISA_I' > bit at this stage so this could be: the change is simple enough and I see no reason to define the cpu_has_mips_r1 at the moment. If we ever need to explicitly handle r1, we can reconsider that. -- markos
