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]> --- drivers/media/i2c/sony-btf-mpx.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/drivers/media/i2c/sony-btf-mpx.c b/drivers/media/i2c/sony-btf-mpx.c index 6b1a04f..69a54b0 100644 --- a/drivers/media/i2c/sony-btf-mpx.c +++ b/drivers/media/i2c/sony-btf-mpx.c @@ -29,7 +29,7 @@ MODULE_DESCRIPTION("sony-btf-mpx driver"); MODULE_LICENSE("GPL v2"); static int debug; -module_param(debug, int, 0644); +module_param(debug, int, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(debug, "debug level 0=off(default) 1=on"); /* #define MPX_DEBUG */ @@ -43,7 +43,7 @@ MODULE_PARM_DESC(debug, "debug level 0=off(default) 1=on"); static int force_mpx_mode = -1; -module_param(force_mpx_mode, int, 0644); +module_param(force_mpx_mode, int, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); struct sony_btf_mpx { struct v4l2_subdev sd; -- 2.9.2
