[patch RFC] [media] staging: solo6x10: fix | vs &

[Ralph Metzler]

Dan Carpenter writes:
 > On Sat, Jun 09, 2012 at 10:47:32AM +0300, Dan Carpenter wrote:
 > > The test here is never true because '&' was used instead of '|'.  It was
 > > the same as:
 > > 
 > > 	if (status & ((1<<16) & (1<<17)) ...
 > > 
 > > Signed-off-by: Dan Carpenter <dan.carpenter at oracle.com>
 > > ---
 > > I don't have this hardware and this one really should be tested or
 > > checked by someone who knows the spec.  It could be that the intent was
 > > to do:
 > > 
 > > 	if ((status & SOLO_IIC_STATE_TRNS) &&
 > > 	    (status & SOLO_IIC_STATE_SIG_ERR) || ...
 > > 
 > 
 > It should be this, yes?  For other similar mistakes it was meant to
 > be this way.

Yes, looks ok.


Regards,
Ralph