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 --- sound/pci/oxygen/se6x.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
diff --git a/sound/pci/oxygen/se6x.c b/sound/pci/oxygen/se6x.c index f70d514..e27bcef 100644 --- a/sound/pci/oxygen/se6x.c +++ b/sound/pci/oxygen/se6x.c @@ -45,11 +45,11 @@ static int index[SNDRV_CARDS] = SNDRV_DEFAULT_IDX; static char *id[SNDRV_CARDS] = SNDRV_DEFAULT_STR; static bool enable[SNDRV_CARDS] = SNDRV_DEFAULT_ENABLE_PNP;
-module_param_array(index, int, NULL, 0444); +module_param_array(index, int, NULL, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(index, "card index"); -module_param_array(id, charp, NULL, 0444); +module_param_array(id, charp, NULL, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(id, "ID string"); -module_param_array(enable, bool, NULL, 0444); +module_param_array(enable, bool, NULL, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(enable, "enable card");
static const struct pci_device_id se6x_ids[] = {