Re: [PATCH 1074/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

[Steven Rostedt]

On Tue,  2 Aug 2016 20:14:04 +0800
Baole Ni <baolex.ni@xxxxxxxxx> 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.
> 

NACK!

I find 0444 more readable than S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH.

-- Steve

> Signed-off-by: Chuansheng Liu <chuansheng.liu@xxxxxxxxx>
> Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <baolex.ni@xxxxxxxxx>
> ---
>  kernel/time/clockevents.c | 4 ++--
>  1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/kernel/time/clockevents.c b/kernel/time/clockevents.c
> index a9b76a4..a0ff0f8 100644
> --- a/kernel/time/clockevents.c
> +++ b/kernel/time/clockevents.c
> @@ -667,7 +667,7 @@ static ssize_t sysfs_show_current_tick_dev(struct device *dev,
>  	raw_spin_unlock_irq(&clockevents_lock);
>  	return count;
>  }
> -static DEVICE_ATTR(current_device, 0444, sysfs_show_current_tick_dev, NULL);
> +static DEVICE_ATTR(current_device, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH, sysfs_show_current_tick_dev, NULL);
>  
>  /* We don't support the abomination of removable broadcast devices */
>  static ssize_t sysfs_unbind_tick_dev(struct device *dev,
> @@ -699,7 +699,7 @@ static ssize_t sysfs_unbind_tick_dev(struct device *dev,
>  	mutex_unlock(&clockevents_mutex);
>  	return ret ? ret : count;
>  }
> -static DEVICE_ATTR(unbind_device, 0200, NULL, sysfs_unbind_tick_dev);
> +static DEVICE_ATTR(unbind_device, S_IWUSR, NULL, sysfs_unbind_tick_dev);
>  
>  #ifdef CONFIG_GENERIC_CLOCKEVENTS_BROADCAST
>  static struct device tick_bc_dev = {