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@gmail.com>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@davemloft.net>

1 files changed, 1 insertions, 1 deletions

diff --git a/net/x25/af_x25.c b/net/x25/af_x25.c
index ebbfe6bbbff9..e19d811788a5 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;