[PATCH 0690/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

[PATCH 0690/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

[Baole Ni]

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.liu@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <baolex.ni@intel.com>
---
 drivers/misc/ti-st/st_kim.c | 4 ++--
 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/misc/ti-st/st_kim.c b/drivers/misc/ti-st/st_kim.c
index bf0d770..2e11441 100644
--- a/drivers/misc/ti-st/st_kim.c
+++ b/drivers/misc/ti-st/st_kim.c
@@ -639,14 +639,14 @@ static struct kobj_attribute uart_dev_name =
 #ifdef DEBUG	/* TODO: move this to debug-fs if possible */
 __ATTR(dev_name, 0644, (void *)show_dev_name, (void *)store_dev_name);
 #else
-__ATTR(dev_name, 0444, (void *)show_dev_name, NULL);
+__ATTR(dev_name, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH, (void *)show_dev_name, NULL);
 #endif
 
 static struct kobj_attribute uart_baud_rate =
 #ifdef DEBUG	/* TODO: move to debugfs */
 __ATTR(baud_rate, 0644, (void *)show_baud_rate, (void *)store_baud_rate);
 #else
-__ATTR(baud_rate, 0444, (void *)show_baud_rate, NULL);
+__ATTR(baud_rate, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH, (void *)show_baud_rate, NULL);
 #endif
 
 static struct kobj_attribute uart_flow_cntrl =
-- 
2.9.2