staging: rtl8723au: hal: check BT_Active and BT_State with correct bit pattern

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>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

diff --git a/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/hal/rtl8723a_bt-coexist.c b/drivers/staging/rtl8723au/hal/rtl8723a_bt-coexist.c
index bfcbd7a349cf8f0f43a86376091401a65860a286..6989580535a4ecec005538a82d011f1bad8e39de 100644 (file)
--- 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;