netdev - Re: [PATCH] WAN: bit and/or confusion

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] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Date:	Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:41:23 -0700 (PDT)
From:	David Miller <davem@...emloft.net>
To:	akpm@...ux-foundation.org
Cc:	roel.kluin@...il.com, romieu@...zoreil.com, netdev@...r.kernel.org
Subject: Re: [PATCH] WAN: bit and/or confusion

From: Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Date: Fri, 14 Aug 2009 16:36:44 -0700

> On Fri, 14 Aug 2009 14:51:46 +0200
> Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@...il.com> wrote:
> 
>> @@ -663,9 +663,9 @@ static inline void dscc4_rx_skb(struct dscc4_dev_priv *dpriv,
>>  	} else {
>>  		if (skb->data[pkt_len] & FrameRdo)
>>  			dev->stats.rx_fifo_errors++;
>> -		else if (!(skb->data[pkt_len] | ~FrameCrc))
>> +		else if (!(skb->data[pkt_len] & ~FrameCrc))
>>  			dev->stats.rx_crc_errors++;
> 
> that's
> 
> 	if (!(x & 0xffffffdf))
> 
> which seems peculiar.  Should it have been
> 
> 	else if (skb->data[pkt_len] & FrameCrc)
> 
> or
> 
> 	else if (!(skb->data[pkt_len] & FrameCrc))

Indeed, I can't tell which variant would be correct.

I'm reverting until someone with a datasheet for this chip speaks up
:-)
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html