提交 06a96b33 编写于 作者: R roel kluin 提交者: David S. Miller

x25: bit and/or confusion in x25_ioctl()?

Looking at commit ebc3f64b 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: NRoel Kluin <roel.kluin@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: NDavid S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>
上级 f14d42f3
......@@ -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;
......
Markdown is supported
0% .
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
先完成此消息的编辑!
想要评论请 注册