On Wed, Jan 27, 2021 at 11:11:17PM -0800, Chaitanya Kulkarni wrote: > Signed-off-by: Chaitanya Kulkarni <chaitanya.kulkarni@xxxxxxx> > --- > fs/iomap/direct-io.c | 5 ++--- > 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/fs/iomap/direct-io.c b/fs/iomap/direct-io.c > index f6c557a1bd25..0737192f7e5c 100644 > --- a/fs/iomap/direct-io.c > +++ b/fs/iomap/direct-io.c > @@ -267,9 +267,8 @@ iomap_dio_bio_actor(struct inode *inode, loff_t pos, loff_t length, > goto out; > } > > - bio = bio_alloc(GFP_KERNEL, nr_pages); > - bio_set_dev(bio, iomap->bdev); > - bio->bi_iter.bi_sector = iomap_sector(iomap, pos); > + bio = bio_new(iomap->bdev, iomap_sector(iomap, pos), 0, 0, > + nr_pages, GFP_KERNEL); op == 0? It seems a little odd to me that we'd set the field to zero and then construct bi_opf later. It also strikes me as a little strange that bi_opf is combined from the third and fourth parameters, but maybe some day you'll want to do some parameter verification on debug kernels or something...? --D > bio->bi_write_hint = dio->iocb->ki_hint; > bio->bi_ioprio = dio->iocb->ki_ioprio; > bio->bi_private = dio; > -- > 2.22.1 >
