linux-kernel - Re: [PATCH 0014/1285] 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] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <20160802134418.GF15910@linux-mips.org>
Date:	Tue, 2 Aug 2016 15:44:18 +0200
From:	Ralf Baechle <ralf@...ux-mips.org>
To:	Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com>,
	Atsushi Nemoto <anemo@....ocn.ne.jp>
Cc:	fenghua.yu@...el.com, robert.jarzmik@...e.fr,
	linux@...linux.org.uk, linux-mips@...ux-mips.org,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, chuansheng.liu@...el.com
Subject: Re: [PATCH 0014/1285] Replace numeric parameter like 0444 with macro

On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:34:21PM +0800, 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@...el.com>
> Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <baolex.ni@...el.com>
> ---
>  arch/mips/txx9/generic/7segled.c | 6 +++---
>  1 file changed, 3 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-)
> 
> diff --git a/arch/mips/txx9/generic/7segled.c b/arch/mips/txx9/generic/7segled.c
> index 566c58b..1fcd1ec 100644
> --- a/arch/mips/txx9/generic/7segled.c
> +++ b/arch/mips/txx9/generic/7segled.c
> @@ -55,8 +55,8 @@ static ssize_t raw_store(struct device *dev,
>  	return size;
>  }
>  
> -static DEVICE_ATTR(ascii, 0200, NULL, ascii_store);
> -static DEVICE_ATTR(raw, 0200, NULL, raw_store);
> +static DEVICE_ATTR(ascii, S_IWUSR, NULL, ascii_store);
> +static DEVICE_ATTR(raw, S_IWUSR, NULL, raw_store);
>  
>  static ssize_t map_seg7_show(struct device *dev,
>  			     struct device_attribute *attr,
> @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ static ssize_t map_seg7_store(struct device *dev,
>  	return size;
>  }
>  
> -static DEVICE_ATTR(map_seg7, 0600, map_seg7_show, map_seg7_store);
> +static DEVICE_ATTR(map_seg7, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR, map_seg7_show, map_seg7_store);
>  
>  static struct bus_type tx_7segled_subsys = {
>  	.name		= "7segled",

I find this one of the case where the number is much understandable than
a cryptic symbol whos name was chosen when C compilers still had
limitations on the symbol length and every byte was sacred.

  Ralf