linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0904/1285] 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: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.

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

Date:	Tue, 2 Aug 2016 16:11:44 +0200
From:	Cornelia Huck <cornelia.huck@...ibm.com>
To:	Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com>
Cc:	borntraeger@...ibm.com, schwidefsky@...ibm.com,
	heiko.carstens@...ibm.com, dwmw2@...radead.org,
	m.chehab@...sung.com, pawel@...iak.com, m.szyprowski@...sung.com,
	kyungmin.park@...sung.com, k.kozlowski@...sung.com,
	linux-s390@...r.kernel.org,
	virtualization@...ts.linux-foundation.org, kvm@...r.kernel.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, chuansheng.liu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0904/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with
 macro

On Tue,  2 Aug 2016 19:56:46 +0800
Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com> 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@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com>
> ---
>  drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c | 2 +-
>  1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> 
> diff --git a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c b/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
> index 8688ad4..56d3671 100644
> --- a/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
> +++ b/drivers/s390/virtio/virtio_ccw.c
> @@ -1074,7 +1074,7 @@ static unsigned long devs_no_auto[__MAX_SSID + 1][__DEV_WORDS];
> 
>  static char *no_auto = "";
> 
> -module_param(no_auto, charp, 0444);
> +module_param(no_auto, charp, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH);
>  MODULE_PARM_DESC(no_auto, "list of ccw bus id ranges not to be auto-onlined");
> 
>  static int virtio_ccw_check_autoonline(struct ccw_device *cdev)

NACK. I find 0444 more readable.

<And some general remarks: Your patches are lacking a proper component
prefix and have a rather long list of people on to: ...and sending
1000+ patches to lkml at once is not a very good idea either.>