linux-kernel - [PATCH 0112/1285] 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>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-Id: <20160802104134.21221-1-baolex.ni@intel.com>
Date:	Tue,  2 Aug 2016 18:41:34 +0800
From:	Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com>
To:	peterhuewe@....de, tpmdd@...horst.net,
	jarkko.sakkinen@...ux.intel.com, jgunthorpe@...idianresearch.com,
	hpa@...or.com, x86@...nel.org
Cc:	tpmdd-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net, linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	chuansheng.liu@...el.com, baolex.ni@...el.com, jslaby@...e.cz,
	peter@...sgaard.com, lee.jones@...aro.org
Subject: [PATCH 0112/1285] 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/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c | 8 ++++----
 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c
index a507006..d9ab2f6 100644
--- a/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c
+++ b/drivers/char/tpm/tpm_tis.c
@@ -294,7 +294,7 @@ out:
 }
 
 static bool itpm;
-module_param(itpm, bool, 0444);
+module_param(itpm, bool, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(itpm, "Force iTPM workarounds (found on some Lenovo laptops)");
 
 /*
@@ -645,7 +645,7 @@ static void tpm_tis_probe_irq(struct tpm_chip *chip, u32 intmask)
 }
 
 static bool interrupts = true;
-module_param(interrupts, bool, 0444);
+module_param(interrupts, bool, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(interrupts, "Enable interrupts");
 
 static void tpm_tis_remove(struct tpm_chip *chip)
@@ -921,7 +921,7 @@ static struct pnp_driver tis_pnp_driver = {
 
 #define TIS_HID_USR_IDX sizeof(tpm_pnp_tbl)/sizeof(struct pnp_device_id) -2
 module_param_string(hid, tpm_pnp_tbl[TIS_HID_USR_IDX].id,
-		    sizeof(tpm_pnp_tbl[TIS_HID_USR_IDX].id), 0444);
+		    sizeof(tpm_pnp_tbl[TIS_HID_USR_IDX].id), S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(hid, "Set additional specific HID for this driver to probe");
 
 #ifdef CONFIG_ACPI
@@ -1060,7 +1060,7 @@ static struct platform_driver tis_drv = {
 
 static bool force;
 #ifdef CONFIG_X86
-module_param(force, bool, 0444);
+module_param(force, bool, S_IRUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH);
 MODULE_PARM_DESC(force, "Force device probe rather than using ACPI entry");
 #endif
 
-- 
2.9.2