On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 04:34:38PM -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
> On 06/29/2011 03:54 PM, J. Bruce Fields wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 29, 2011 at 03:49:10PM -0400, Bryan Schumaker wrote:
> >> On 05/20/2011 04:13 PM, bjschuma@xxxxxxxxxx wrote:
> >>> +__be32
> >>> +nfsd4_do_test_stateid(stateid_t *stateid, int flags)
> >>> +{
> >>> + __be32 ret = nfs4_validate_stateid(stateid, flags);
> >>> + if (!ret)
> >>> + ret = nfs4_validate_stateid(stateid, flags);
> >>> + return ret;
> >>
> >> Looking back at this, I'm not convinced that I need to call nfs4_validate_stateid() twice with the same stateid and flags. What is the status of these patches? Should I resubmit everything or send in a small patch to fix this?
> >
> > Whoops, lazy review on my part....
> >
> > Looks like I'd applied that locally but not pushed it out to my public
> > tree yet, so I could still take a replacement.
>
> Ok, sounds good.
> >
> > How are you testing these, by the way? On second thoughts, I think I
> > may have already asked you that, and forgotten the answer, so don't
> > bother answering here--just add some text to the changelog and then I'll
> > know how to find the answer next time.
>
> I found this as I was going through my fault injection code. I'm going to double check these with my fault injection changes and then try to send in updates for both next week.
Sounds good, thanks Bryan.--b.
--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-nfs" in
the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
