From 06a96b33aea838b61a6eeccded781a305cf85a12 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: roel kluin Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2009 00:59:42 +0000 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 Signed-off-by: David S. Miller --- net/x25/af_x25.c | 2 +- 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-) diff --git a/net/x25/af_x25.c b/net/x25/af_x25.c index ebbfe6bbbff..e19d811788a 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; -- 2.46.0