From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Baole Ni Subject: [PATCH 0293/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 18:57:31 +0800 Message-ID: <20160802105731.907-1-baolex.ni@intel.com> Return-path: Received: from mga11.intel.com ([192.55.52.93]:43413 "EHLO mga11.intel.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1754615AbcHBLg2 (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Aug 2016 07:36:28 -0400 Sender: linux-input-owner@vger.kernel.org List-Id: linux-input@vger.kernel.org To: dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com, hal.rosenstock@gmail.com, dledford@redhat.com, sean.hefty@intel.com, bp@alien8.de Cc: linux-input@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, rdunlap@infradead.org, standby24x7@gmail.com, jkosina@suse.com, chuansheng.liu@intel.com, baolex.ni@intel.com 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/input/touchscreen/ili210x.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/drivers/input/touchscreen/ili210x.c b/drivers/input/touchscreen/ili210x.c index ddf694b..a8a7089 100644 --- a/drivers/input/touchscreen/ili210x.c +++ b/drivers/input/touchscreen/ili210x.c @@ -169,7 +169,7 @@ static ssize_t ili210x_calibrate(struct device *dev, return count; } -static DEVICE_ATTR(calibrate, 0644, NULL, ili210x_calibrate); +static DEVICE_ATTR(calibrate, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH, NULL, ili210x_calibrate); static struct attribute *ili210x_attributes[] = { &dev_attr_calibrate.attr, -- 2.9.2