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 <chuansheng....@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <baolex...@intel.com>
---
drivers/media/firewire/firedtv-avc.c | 4 ++--
1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/media/firewire/firedtv-avc.c
b/drivers/media/firewire/firedtv-avc.c
index 251a556..e0fbc75 100644
--- a/drivers/media/firewire/firedtv-avc.c
+++ b/drivers/media/firewire/firedtv-avc.c
@@ -117,7 +117,7 @@ static void pad_operands(struct avc_command_frame *c, int
from)
#define AVC_DEBUG_FCP_PAYLOADS 0x8000
static int avc_debug;
-module_param_named(debug, avc_debug, int, 0644);
+module_param_named(debug, avc_debug, int, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP |
S_IROTH);
MODULE_PARM_DESC(debug, "Verbose logging (none = 0"
", FCP subactions"
": READ DESCRIPTOR = " __stringify(AVC_DEBUG_READ_DESCRIPTOR)
@@ -140,7 +140,7 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(debug, "Verbose logging (none = 0"
*/
static unsigned int num_fake_ca_system_ids;
static int fake_ca_system_ids[4] = { -1, -1, -1, -1 };
-module_param_array(fake_ca_system_ids, int, &num_fake_ca_system_ids, 0644);
+module_param_array(fake_ca_system_ids, int, &num_fake_ca_system_ids, S_IRUSR |
S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH);
MODULE_PARM_DESC(fake_ca_system_ids, "If your CAM application manufacturer "
"does not have the same ca_system_id as your CAS, you can "
"override what ca_system_ids are presented to the "
--
2.9.2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
