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....@intel.com>
Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <baolex...@intel.com>
---
drivers/media/pci/cx88/cx88-i2c.c | 6 +++---
1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/drivers/media/pci/cx88/cx88-i2c.c
b/drivers/media/pci/cx88/cx88-i2c.c
index cf2d696..d9764cd 100644
--- a/drivers/media/pci/cx88/cx88-i2c.c
+++ b/drivers/media/pci/cx88/cx88-i2c.c
@@ -36,15 +36,15 @@
#include <media/v4l2-common.h>
static unsigned int i2c_debug;
-module_param(i2c_debug, int, 0644);
+module_param(i2c_debug, int, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH);
MODULE_PARM_DESC(i2c_debug,"enable debug messages [i2c]");
static unsigned int i2c_scan;
-module_param(i2c_scan, int, 0444);
+module_param(i2c_scan, int, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH);
MODULE_PARM_DESC(i2c_scan,"scan i2c bus at insmod time");
static unsigned int i2c_udelay = 5;
-module_param(i2c_udelay, int, 0644);
+module_param(i2c_udelay, int, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH);
MODULE_PARM_DESC(i2c_udelay,"i2c delay at insmod time, in usecs "
"(should be 5 or higher). Lower value means higher bus speed.");
--
2.9.2
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-media" in
the body of a message to majord...@vger.kernel.org
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
