From: Vadim Fedorenko <vadim.fedorenko@linux.dev>
Sent: Wednesday, 5 February 2025 12:48
To: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>; Danielle Ratson <redacted>
Cc: netdev@vger.kernel.org; mkubecek@suse.cz; matt@traverse.com.au;
daniel.zahka@gmail.com; Amit Cohen [off-list ref]; NBU-mlxsw
[off-list ref]
Subject: Re: [PATCH ethtool-next v3 10/16] qsfp: Add JSON output handling
to --module-info in SFF8636 modules

On 05/02/2025 02:34, Jakub Kicinski wrote:

quoted

On Tue, 4 Feb 2025 15:39:51 +0200 Danielle Ratson wrote:

quoted

+#define YESNO(x) (((x) != 0) ? "Yes" : "No") #define ONOFF(x) (((x)
+!= 0) ? "On" : "Off")

Are these needed ? It appears we have them defined twice after this
series:

$ git grep 'define YES'
cmis.h:#define YESNO(x) (((x) != 0) ? "Yes" : "No")
module-common.h:#define YESNO(x) (((x) != 0) ? "Yes" : "No")

Are we strict on capital first letter here? If not then maybe try to use
str_yes_no() and remove this definition completely?

I only moved it to a different file, I didn’t find a reason to change it right now. 
I can add a separate patch to change all the YESNO and ONOFF uses, and remove those definitions, do you want me to do that?
To be honest, I don’t know if there is a justification to do it in that patchset, considering it is a pretty long anyway.