x25: bit and/or confusion in x25_ioctl()?
Looking at commit ebc3f64b86
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>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
This commit is contained in:
parent
f14d42f314
commit
06a96b33ae
|
@ -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;
|
||||
|
|
Loading…
Reference in New Issue