From: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> [ Upstream commit 1944015fe9c1d9fa5e9eb7ffbbb5ef8954d6753b ] Coverity reported the strange "if (~...)" condition that's always true. It suggested that ! was intended instead of ~, but upon further analysis I'm convinced that what really was intended was a comparison to 0xff/0xffff (in HT/VHT cases respectively), since this indicates that all of the rates are enabled. Change the comparison accordingly. I'm guessing this never really mattered because a reset to not having a rate mask is basically equivalent to having a mask that enables all rates. Reported-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> Fixes: 2ffbe6d33366 ("mac80211: fix and optimize MCS mask handling") Fixes: b119ad6e726c ("mac80211: add rate mask logic for vht rates") Reviewed-by: Colin Ian King <colin.king@canonical.com> Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20210212112213.36b38078f569.I8546a20c80bc1669058eb... Signed-off-by: Johannes Berg <johannes.berg@intel.com> Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@kernel.org> Signed-off-by: Yang Yingliang <yangyingliang@huawei.com> --- net/mac80211/cfg.c | 4 ++-- 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 2 deletions(-) diff --git a/net/mac80211/cfg.c b/net/mac80211/cfg.c index 9926455dd546d..f484f9fc62ca9 100644 --- a/net/mac80211/cfg.c +++ b/net/mac80211/cfg.c @@ -2777,14 +2777,14 @@ static int ieee80211_set_bitrate_mask(struct wiphy *wiphy, continue; for (j = 0; j < IEEE80211_HT_MCS_MASK_LEN; j++) { - if (~sdata->rc_rateidx_mcs_mask[i][j]) { + if (sdata->rc_rateidx_mcs_mask[i][j] != 0xff) { sdata->rc_has_mcs_mask[i] = true; break; } } for (j = 0; j < NL80211_VHT_NSS_MAX; j++) { - if (~sdata->rc_rateidx_vht_mcs_mask[i][j]) { + if (sdata->rc_rateidx_vht_mcs_mask[i][j] != 0xffff) { sdata->rc_has_vht_mcs_mask[i] = true; break; } -- 2.25.1