linux-kernel - [PATCH 0975/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20160802120420.15064-1-baolex.ni@intel.com>
Date:	Tue,  2 Aug 2016 20:04:20 +0800
From:	Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com>
To:	gregkh@...uxfoundation.org, stf_xl@...pl, m.chehab@...sung.com,
	m.szyprowski@...sung.com, kyungmin.park@...sung.com,
	k.kozlowski@...sung.com
Cc:	linux-usb@...r.kernel.org, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	stern@...land.harvard.edu, kborer@...il.com,
	michele.curti@...il.com, rpathak@...teon.com, sesse@...gle.com,
	reillyg@...omium.org, viro@...iv.linux.org.uk,
	chuansheng.liu@...el.com, baolex.ni@...el.com
Subject: [PATCH 0975/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

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@...el.com>
Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com>
---
 drivers/usb/core/devio.c | 2 +-
 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/usb/core/devio.c b/drivers/usb/core/devio.c
index e9f5043..fb3c152 100644
--- a/drivers/usb/core/devio.c
+++ b/drivers/usb/core/devio.c
@@ -135,7 +135,7 @@ enum snoop_when {
 
 /* Limit on the total amount of memory we can allocate for transfers */
 static unsigned usbfs_memory_mb = 16;
-module_param(usbfs_memory_mb, uint, 0644);
+module_param(usbfs_memory_mb, uint, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(usbfs_memory_mb,
 		"maximum MB allowed for usbfs buffers (0 = no limit)");
 
-- 
2.9.2