From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S967389AbcHBP15 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Aug 2016 11:27:57 -0400 Received: from mga01.intel.com ([192.55.52.88]:16326 "EHLO mga01.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934801AbcHBMc7 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Aug 2016 08:32:59 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,460,1464678000"; d="scan'208";a="858136929" From: Baole Ni To: a.zummo@towertech.it, alexandre.belloni@free-electrons.com, paulus@samba.org, mpe@ellerman.id.au, dwmw2@infradead.org, m.chehab@samsung.com, pawel@osciak.com, m.szyprowski@samsung.com, kyungmin.park@samsung.com, k.kozlowski@samsung.com Cc: rtc-linux@googlegroups.com, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, chuansheng.liu@intel.com, baolex.ni@intel.com Subject: [PATCH 0874/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 19:54:07 +0800 Message-Id: <20160802115407.8242-1-baolex.ni@intel.com> X-Mailer: git-send-email 2.9.2 Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org 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 Signed-off-by: Baole Ni --- drivers/rtc/rtc-test.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/rtc/rtc-test.c b/drivers/rtc/rtc-test.c index 3a2da4c..37e10e3 100644 --- a/drivers/rtc/rtc-test.c +++ b/drivers/rtc/rtc-test.c @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ #include static int test_mmss64; -module_param(test_mmss64, int, 0644); +module_param(test_mmss64, int, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(test_mmss64, "Test struct rtc_class_ops.set_mmss64()."); static struct platform_device *test0 = NULL, *test1 = NULL; -- 2.9.2