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/ctxfi/xfi.c | 8 ++++---- 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/pci/ctxfi/xfi.c b/sound/pci/ctxfi/xfi.c index f2f3277..81dbbd4 100644 --- a/sound/pci/ctxfi/xfi.c +++ b/sound/pci/ctxfi/xfi.c @@ -35,13 +35,13 @@ static char *id[SNDRV_CARDS] = SNDRV_DEFAULT_STR; static bool enable[SNDRV_CARDS] = SNDRV_DEFAULT_ENABLE_PNP; static unsigned int subsystem[SNDRV_CARDS];

-module_param_array(index, int, NULL, 0444); +module_param_array(index, int, NULL, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(index, "Index value for Creative X-Fi driver"); -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 for Creative X-Fi driver"); -module_param_array(enable, bool, NULL, 0444); +module_param_array(enable, bool, NULL, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(enable, "Enable Creative X-Fi driver"); -module_param_array(subsystem, int, NULL, 0444); +module_param_array(subsystem, int, NULL, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH); MODULE_PARM_DESC(subsystem, "Override subsystem ID for Creative X-Fi driver");

static const struct pci_device_id ct_pci_dev_ids[] = {