Colin King writes:
> From: Colin Ian King
>
> BT_Active and BT_State are being masked with 0x00ff so it the subsequent
> comparisons with 0x are therefore a buggy check. Instead, check them
> against 0x00ff.
>
> Unfortunately I couldn't find a datasheet or hardware to see if 0xff
From: Colin Ian King
BT_Active and BT_State are being masked with 0x00ff so it the subsequent
comparisons with 0x are therefore a buggy check. Instead, check them
against 0x00ff.
Unfortunately I couldn't find a datasheet or hardware to see if 0x
is an expected invalid bi