[<prev] [next>] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <4ACC749E.4060806@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 07 Oct 2009 12:59:42 +0200
From: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@...il.com>
To: linux-x25@...r.kernel.org, netdev@...r.kernel.org,
"David S. Miller" <davem@...emloft.net>,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>
Subject: [PATCH] x25: bit and/or confusion in x25_ioctl()?
Looking at commit ebc3f64b864f it appears that this was intended
and not the original, equivalent to `if (facilities.reverse & ~0x81)'.
In x25_parse_facilities() that patch changed how facilities->reverse
was set. No other bits were set than 0x80 and/or 0x01.
Signed-off-by: Roel Kluin <roel.kluin@...il.com>
---
This is correct isn't it?
diff --git a/net/x25/af_x25.c b/net/x25/af_x25.c
index 7fa9c7a..ca4dc28 100644
--- a/net/x25/af_x25.c
+++ b/net/x25/af_x25.c
@@ -1363,7 +1363,7 @@ static int x25_ioctl(struct socket *sock, unsigned int cmd, unsigned long arg)
facilities.throughput > 0xDD)
break;
if (facilities.reverse &&
- (facilities.reverse | 0x81)!= 0x81)
+ (facilities.reverse & 0x81) != 0x81)
break;
x25->facilities = facilities;
rc = 0;
--
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
Powered by blists - more mailing lists