I find that the developers often just specified the numeric value when calling a macro which is defined with a parameter for access permission. As we know, these numeric value for access permission have had the corresponding macro, and that using macro can improve the robustness and readability of the code, thus, I suggest replacing the numeric parameter with the macro.
Signed-off-by: Chuansheng Liu <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <[email protected]> --- drivers/media/pci/cx88/cx88-cards.c | 10 +++++----- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 5 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/media/pci/cx88/cx88-cards.c b/drivers/media/pci/cx88/cx88-cards.c index 8f2556e..ca02a4d 100644 --- a/drivers/media/pci/cx88/cx88-cards.c +++ b/drivers/media/pci/cx88/cx88-cards.c @@ -34,20 +34,20 @@ static unsigned int tuner[] = {[0 ... (CX88_MAXBOARDS - 1)] = UNSET }; static unsigned int radio[] = {[0 ... (CX88_MAXBOARDS - 1)] = UNSET }; static unsigned int card[] = {[0 ... (CX88_MAXBOARDS - 1)] = UNSET }; -module_param_array(tuner, int, NULL, 0444); -module_param_array(radio, int, NULL, 0444); -module_param_array(card, int, NULL, 0444); +module_param_array(tuner, int, NULL, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); +module_param_array(radio, int, NULL, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); +module_param_array(card, int, NULL, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(tuner,"tuner type"); MODULE_PARM_DESC(radio,"radio tuner type"); MODULE_PARM_DESC(card,"card type"); static unsigned int latency = UNSET; -module_param(latency,int,0444); +module_param(latency,int,S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(latency,"pci latency timer"); static int disable_ir; -module_param(disable_ir, int, 0444); +module_param(disable_ir, int, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(disable_ir, "Disable IR support"); #define info_printk(core, fmt, arg...) \ -- 2.9.2
