* [PATCH] x25: bit and/or confusion in x25_ioctl()?
@ 2009-10-07 10:59 Roel Kluin
2009-10-13 10:47 ` David Miller
0 siblings, 1 reply; 2+ messages in thread
From: Roel Kluin @ 2009-10-07 10:59 UTC (permalink / raw)
To: linux-x25, netdev, David S. Miller, Andrew Morton
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@gmail.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;
^ permalink raw reply related [flat|nested] 2+ messages in thread
end of thread, other threads:[~2009-10-13 10:47 UTC | newest]
Thread overview: 2+ messages (download: mbox.gz follow: Atom feed
-- links below jump to the message on this page --
2009-10-07 10:59 [PATCH] x25: bit and/or confusion in x25_ioctl()? Roel Kluin
2009-10-13 10:47 ` David Miller
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.