On Tue, Aug 02, 2016 at 06:50:39PM +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 <[email protected]> > Signed-off-by: Baole Ni <[email protected]> > --- > drivers/hid/hid-corsair.c | 4 ++-- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/drivers/hid/hid-corsair.c b/drivers/hid/hid-corsair.c > index 717704e..5353847 100644 > --- a/drivers/hid/hid-corsair.c > +++ b/drivers/hid/hid-corsair.c > @@ -370,8 +370,8 @@ static ssize_t k90_store_current_profile(struct device > *dev, > return count; > } > > -static DEVICE_ATTR(macro_mode, 0644, k90_show_macro_mode, > k90_store_macro_mode); > -static DEVICE_ATTR(current_profile, 0644, k90_show_current_profile, > +static DEVICE_ATTR(macro_mode, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH, > k90_show_macro_mode, k90_store_macro_mode); > +static DEVICE_ATTR(current_profile, S_IRUSR | S_IWUSR | S_IRGRP | S_IROTH, > k90_show_current_profile, > k90_store_current_profile);
DEVICE_ATTR_RW() please.
