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]> --- net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_h323_main.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_h323_main.c b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_h323_main.c index 9511af0..ae407c8 100644 --- a/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_h323_main.c +++ b/net/netfilter/nf_conntrack_h323_main.c @@ -36,15 +36,15 @@ /* Parameters */ static unsigned int default_rrq_ttl __read_mostly = 300; -module_param(default_rrq_ttl, uint, 0600); +module_param(default_rrq_ttl, uint, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR); MODULE_PARM_DESC(default_rrq_ttl, "use this TTL if it's missing in RRQ"); static int gkrouted_only __read_mostly = 1; -module_param(gkrouted_only, int, 0600); +module_param(gkrouted_only, int, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR); MODULE_PARM_DESC(gkrouted_only, "only accept calls from gatekeeper"); static bool callforward_filter __read_mostly = true; -module_param(callforward_filter, bool, 0600); +module_param(callforward_filter, bool, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR); MODULE_PARM_DESC(callforward_filter, "only create call forwarding expectations " "if both endpoints are on different sides " "(determined by routing information)"); -- 2.9.2
