lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2016]   [Jul]   [14]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH] staging: rtl8723au: hal: check BT_Active and BT_State with correct bit pattern
Date
From: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>

BT_Active and BT_State are being masked with 0x00ffffff so it the subsequent
comparisons with 0xffffffff are therefore a buggy check. Instead, check them
against 0x00ffffff.

Unfortunately I couldn't find a datasheet or hardware to see if 0xffffffff
is an expected invalid bit pattern that should be checked before BT_Active and
BT_State are masked with 0x00ffffff, so for now, this fix seems like the least
risky approach.

Signed-off-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com>
---
drivers/staging/rtl8723au/hal/rtl8723a_bt-coexist.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/hal/rtl8723a_bt-coexist.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/hal/rtl8723a_bt-coexist.c
index bfcbd7a..6989580 100644
--- a/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/hal/rtl8723a_bt-coexist.c
+++ b/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/hal/rtl8723a_bt-coexist.c
@@ -9824,7 +9824,7 @@ void BTDM_CheckBTIdleChange1Ant(struct rtw_adapter *padapter)
BT_Polling = rtl8723au_read32(padapter, regBTPolling);
RTPRINT(FBT, BT_TRACE, ("[DM][BT], BT_Polling(0x%x) =%x\n", regBTPolling, BT_Polling));

- if (BT_Active == 0xffffffff && BT_State == 0xffffffff && BT_Polling == 0xffffffff)
+ if (BT_Active == 0x00ffffff && BT_State == 0x00ffffff && BT_Polling == 0xffffffff)
return;
if (BT_Polling == 0)
return;
--
2.8.1
\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2016-07-14 13:01    [W:0.022 / U:1.960 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site