On Sat, Apr 29, 2017 at 10:05 AM, Martin Kaiser wrote:
> Thus wrote Andy Shevchenko (andy.shevche...@gmail.com):
>> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Martin Kaiser wrote:
>> Aren't 0 and 0444 different by meaning?
>
> my undestanding is that proc_create() calls proc_create_data(), where
>
>i
Hello Andy,
Thus wrote Andy Shevchenko (andy.shevche...@gmail.com):
> On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 12:11 PM, Martin Kaiser wrote:
> > checkpatch is asking for a 4 digit octal number. And at least for me,
> > 0444 makes it clearer what the permissions actually are. Yes, somewhere
> > in the code, I c
Thus wrote Greg Kroah-Hartman (gre...@linuxfoundation.org):
> > ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissions
> > #285: FILE: drivers/char/misc.c:285:
> > + ret = proc_create("misc", 0, NULL, &misc_proc_fops);
> Come on now, think about what this is saying. Is 0 not also an octal
> nu
On Tue, Apr 18, 2017 at 09:51:31AM +0200, Martin Kaiser wrote:
> Thus wrote Greg Kroah-Hartman (gre...@linuxfoundation.org):
>
> > > - ret = proc_create("misc", 0, NULL, &misc_proc_fops);
> > > + ret = proc_create("misc", 0444, NULL, &misc_proc_fops);
>
> > What checkpatch warning does this fix?
Thus wrote Greg Kroah-Hartman (gre...@linuxfoundation.org):
> > - ret = proc_create("misc", 0, NULL, &misc_proc_fops);
> > + ret = proc_create("misc", 0444, NULL, &misc_proc_fops);
> What checkpatch warning does this fix? 0 is a number :)
ERROR: Use 4 digit octal (0777) not decimal permissi
On Mon, Apr 17, 2017 at 08:22:57PM +0200, Martin Kaiser wrote:
> Set the permissions for /proc/misc to 0444 explicitly. At the moment,
> we're using 0 and have proc_create_data() convert this to 0444.
> This fixes a checkpatch warning.
>
> Signed-off-by: Martin Kaiser
> ---
> v2:
>separate pa
6 matches
Mail list logo
