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/virtuoso.c | 6 +++--- 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/pci/oxygen/virtuoso.c b/sound/pci/oxygen/virtuoso.c index 83de6fb..7f81d42 100644 --- a/sound/pci/oxygen/virtuoso.c +++ b/sound/pci/oxygen/virtuoso.c @@ -34,11 +34,11 @@ 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 xonar_ids[] = {