On Thu, Feb 17, 2022 at 1:45 PM <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> From: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx>
>
> This potentially will cause bug in future if using the old ceph
> version and some members may skipped initialized in handle_reply.
>
> Signed-off-by: Xiubo Li <xiubli@xxxxxxxxxx>
> ---
> fs/ceph/mds_client.c | 3 ++-
> 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>
> diff --git a/fs/ceph/mds_client.c b/fs/ceph/mds_client.c
> index 93e5e3c4ba64..c3b1e73c5fbf 100644
> --- a/fs/ceph/mds_client.c
> +++ b/fs/ceph/mds_client.c
> @@ -2286,7 +2286,8 @@ int ceph_alloc_readdir_reply_buffer(struct ceph_mds_request *req,
> order = get_order(size * num_entries);
> while (order >= 0) {
> rinfo->dir_entries = (void*)__get_free_pages(GFP_KERNEL |
> - __GFP_NOWARN,
> + __GFP_NOWARN |
> + __GFP_ZERO,
> order);
> if (rinfo->dir_entries)
> break;
> --
> 2.27.0
>
Looks good.
Acked-by: Venky Shankar <vshankar@xxxxxxxxxx>
--
Cheers,
Venky
