On 08/02/16 15:33, Baole Ni wrote:

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/soc/omap/mcbsp.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/sound/soc/omap/mcbsp.c b/sound/soc/omap/mcbsp.c index 4a16e77..3938336 100644 --- a/sound/soc/omap/mcbsp.c +++ b/sound/soc/omap/mcbsp.c @@ -857,7 +857,7 @@ unlock: return size; }

-static DEVICE_ATTR(dma_op_mode, 0644, dma_op_mode_show, dma_op_mode_store); +static DEVICE_ATTR(dma_op_mode, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH, dma_op_mode_show, dma_op_mode_store);

I prefer to have the octal representation, more compact, easier to understand.

static const struct attribute *additional_attrs[] = { &dev_attr_max_tx_thres.attr, @@ -926,7 +926,7 @@ out: return size; }

-static DEVICE_ATTR(st_taps, 0644, st_taps_show, st_taps_store); +static DEVICE_ATTR(st_taps, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH, st_taps_show, st_taps_store);

static const struct attribute *sidetone_attrs[] = { &dev_attr_st_taps.attr,