Re: [Intel-gfx] [PATCH 0197/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

[Lukas Wunner <lukas@wunner.de>]

On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 02:37:37PM +0300, Ville Syrjälä wrote:
> On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:48:47PM +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 <chuansheng.liu@intel.com>
> > Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <baolex.ni@intel.com>
> > ---
> >  drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.c | 64 +++++++++++++++++++-------------------
> >  1 file changed, 32 insertions(+), 32 deletions(-)
> > 
> > diff --git a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.c b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.c
> > index 1779f02..7184e06 100644
> > --- a/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.c
> > +++ b/drivers/gpu/drm/i915/i915_params.c
> > @@ -60,22 +60,22 @@ struct i915_params i915 __read_mostly = {
> >  	.inject_load_failure = 0,
> >  };
> >  
> > -module_param_named(modeset, i915.modeset, int, 0400);
> > +module_param_named(modeset, i915.modeset, int, S_IRUSR);
> 
> At least I can't read those macros. Octal is much clearer IMO.

It's also easier to grep for, say, 644, rather than formulating a
regex with all possible ordering permutations of these macros.

Best regards,

Lukas