Define the macros in terms of each other.
This makes them easier to understand and also will make it easier to
implement the transition machinery for 'const struct attribute'.

__ATTR_RO_MODE() can't be implemented in terms of __ATTR() as not all
attributes have a .store callback. The same issue theoretically exists
for __ATTR_WO(), but practically that does not occur today.

Reorder __ATTR_RO() below __ATTR_RO_MODE() to keep the order of the
macro definition consistent with respect to each other.

Signed-off-by: Thomas Weißschuh <linux@weissschuh.net>
---
 include/linux/sysfs.h | 22 +++++++---------------
 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 15 deletions(-)

diff --git a/include/linux/sysfs.h b/include/linux/sysfs.h
index ec4aed8c8181..5ce303dec7d7 100644
--- a/include/linux/sysfs.h
+++ b/include/linux/sysfs.h
@@ -251,28 +251,20 @@ struct attribute_group {
 	.store	= _store,						\
 }
 
-#define __ATTR_RO(_name) {						\
-	.attr	= { .name = __stringify(_name), .mode = 0444 },		\
-	.show	= _name##_show,						\
-}
-
 #define __ATTR_RO_MODE(_name, _mode) {					\
 	.attr	= { .name = __stringify(_name),				\
 		    .mode = VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS(_mode) },		\
 	.show	= _name##_show,						\
 }
 
-#define __ATTR_RW_MODE(_name, _mode) {					\
-	.attr	= { .name = __stringify(_name),				\
-		    .mode = VERIFY_OCTAL_PERMISSIONS(_mode) },		\
-	.show	= _name##_show,						\
-	.store	= _name##_store,					\
-}
+#define __ATTR_RO(_name)						\
+	__ATTR_RO_MODE(_name, 0444)
 
-#define __ATTR_WO(_name) {						\
-	.attr	= { .name = __stringify(_name), .mode = 0200 },		\
-	.store	= _name##_store,					\
-}
+#define __ATTR_RW_MODE(_name, _mode)					\
+	__ATTR(_name, _mode, _name##_show, _name##_store)
+
+#define __ATTR_WO(_name)						\
+	__ATTR(_name, 0200, NULL, _name##_store)
 
 #define __ATTR_RW(_name) __ATTR(_name, 0644, _name##_show, _name##_store)
 

-- 
2.51.0