From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id S967714AbcHBPrm (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Aug 2016 11:47:42 -0400 Received: from out5-smtp.messagingengine.com ([66.111.4.29]:55832 "EHLO out5-smtp.messagingengine.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S934706AbcHBMWX (ORCPT ); Tue, 2 Aug 2016 08:22:23 -0400 X-Sasl-enc: MSFvdeAhzAnoIZs0v/VlRHvuO27mqHZ5zu2bVqg54vLo 1470140517 Date: Tue, 2 Aug 2016 14:22:13 +0200 From: Greg KH To: Baole Ni Cc: jdelvare@suse.com, linux@roeck-us.net, airlied@linux.ie, kgene@kernel.org, k.kozlowski@samsung.com, dougthompson@xmission.com, bp@alien8.de, linux-hwmon@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, chuansheng.liu@intel.com, aduggan@synaptics.com, dianders@chromium.org Subject: Re: [PATCH 0239/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro Message-ID: <20160802122213.GA23544@kroah.com> References: <20160802105221.29678-1-baolex.ni@intel.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <20160802105221.29678-1-baolex.ni@intel.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.6.2 (2016-07-01) Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:52:21PM +0800, Baole Ni wrote: > 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/hwmon/fschmd.c | 2 +- > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/hwmon/fschmd.c b/drivers/hwmon/fschmd.c > index d58abdc..a7e4885 100644 > --- a/drivers/hwmon/fschmd.c > +++ b/drivers/hwmon/fschmd.c > @@ -602,7 +602,7 @@ static ssize_t store_alert_led(struct device *dev, > return count; > } > > -static DEVICE_ATTR(alert_led, 0644, show_alert_led, store_alert_led); > +static DEVICE_ATTR(alert_led, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH, show_alert_led, store_alert_led); Use DEVICE_ATTR_RW() please.