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 <[email protected]> Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <[email protected]> --- security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c b/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c index 38f2ed8..5858470 100644 --- a/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c +++ b/security/integrity/ima/ima_crypto.c @@ -34,7 +34,7 @@ struct ahash_completion { /* minimum file size for ahash use */ static unsigned long ima_ahash_minsize; -module_param_named(ahash_minsize, ima_ahash_minsize, ulong, 0644); +module_param_named(ahash_minsize, ima_ahash_minsize, ulong, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(ahash_minsize, "Minimum file size for ahash use"); /* default is 0 - 1 page. */ @@ -61,7 +61,7 @@ static const struct kernel_param_ops param_ops_bufsize = { }; #define param_check_bufsize(name, p) __param_check(name, p, unsigned int) -module_param_named(ahash_bufsize, ima_bufsize, bufsize, 0644); +module_param_named(ahash_bufsize, ima_bufsize, bufsize, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(ahash_bufsize, "Maximum ahash buffer size"); static struct crypto_shash *ima_shash_tfm; -- 2.9.2
