lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2017]   [Oct]   [24]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
Patch in this message
/
From
Subject[PATCH 4.9 36/48] xfs: report zeroed or not correctly in xfs_zero_range()
Date
4.9-stable review patch.  If anyone has any objections, please let me know.

------------------

From: Eryu Guan <eguan@redhat.com>

commit d20a5e3851969fa685f118a80e4df670255a4e8d upstream.

The 'did_zero' param of xfs_zero_range() was not passed to
iomap_zero_range() correctly. This was introduced by commit
7bb41db3ea16 ("xfs: handle 64-bit length in xfs_iozero"), and found
by code inspection.

Signed-off-by: Eryu Guan <eguan@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Carlos Maiolino <cmaiolino@redhat.com>
Reviewed-by: Christoph Hellwig <hch@lst.de>
Reviewed-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Darrick J. Wong <darrick.wong@oracle.com>
Signed-off-by: Greg Kroah-Hartman <gregkh@linuxfoundation.org>

---
fs/xfs/xfs_file.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)

--- a/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
+++ b/fs/xfs/xfs_file.c
@@ -92,7 +92,7 @@ xfs_zero_range(
xfs_off_t count,
bool *did_zero)
{
- return iomap_zero_range(VFS_I(ip), pos, count, NULL, &xfs_iomap_ops);
+ return iomap_zero_range(VFS_I(ip), pos, count, did_zero, &xfs_iomap_ops);
}

int

\
 
 \ /
  Last update: 2017-10-24 15:06    [W:0.547 / U:0.112 seconds]
©2003-2020 Jasper Spaans|hosted at Digital Ocean and TransIP|Read the blog|Advertise on this site