From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S965142AbcHBMg5 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Aug 2016 08:36:57 -0400 Received: from mga14.intel.com ([192.55.52.115]:41773 "EHLO mga14.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S965123AbcHBMgu (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Aug 2016 08:36:50 -0400 X-ExtLoop1: 1 X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.28,460,1464678000"; d="scan'208";a="149322581" From: Baole Ni To: oleg.drokin@intel.com, andreas.dilger@intel.com, gregkh@linuxfoundation.org, jejb@linux.vnet.ibm.com, martin.petersen@oracle.com, m.chehab@samsung.com, pawel@osciak.com, m.szyprowski@samsung.com, kyungmin.park@samsung.com, k.kozlowski@samsung.com Cc: lustre-devel@lists.lustre.org, devel@driverdev.osuosl.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, jsimmons@infradead.org, amir.shehata@intel.com, doug.s.oucharek@intel.com, liang.zhen@intel.com, fzago@cray.com, chuansheng.liu@intel.com, baolex.ni@intel.com Subject: [PATCH 0929/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 19:59:07 +0800 Message-Id: <20160802115907.11939-1-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/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/api-ni.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/api-ni.c b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/api-ni.c index fe0dbe7..7a35c78 100644 --- a/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/api-ni.c +++ b/drivers/staging/lustre/lnet/lnet/api-ni.c @@ -47,19 +47,19 @@ lnet_t the_lnet; /* THE state of the network */ EXPORT_SYMBOL(the_lnet); static char *ip2nets = ""; -module_param(ip2nets, charp, 0444); +module_param(ip2nets, charp, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(ip2nets, "LNET network <- IP table"); static char *networks = ""; -module_param(networks, charp, 0444); +module_param(networks, charp, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(networks, "local networks"); static char *routes = ""; -module_param(routes, charp, 0444); +module_param(routes, charp, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(routes, "routes to non-local networks"); static int rnet_htable_size = LNET_REMOTE_NETS_HASH_DEFAULT; -module_param(rnet_htable_size, int, 0444); +module_param(rnet_htable_size, int, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(rnet_htable_size, "size of remote network hash table"); static int lnet_ping(lnet_process_id_t id, int timeout_ms, -- 2.9.2