From: "J. Bruce Fields" <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx> For the purposes of open-to-close cache consistency, I don't see why a setattr (if it's something like "ftruncate", that's associated with an open) should be treated any differently than a write. In the v4 case (in the absence of pre-op attributes) that means we should fake up pre-op attributes as we do for write. This allows us to handle reads from cache in more cases. Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields <bfields@xxxxxxxxxx> --- fs/nfs/inode.c | 7 ++++++- 1 files changed, 6 insertions(+), 1 deletions(-) We discussed this a few weeks ago and you seemed amenable to the basic idea, but I have doubts about my implementation: - Is this really the right place to do this? - I'm changing v2/v3 behavior here too, where in the write case I think it's only v4 that does the nfs_post_op_update_inode_force_wcc(). Also cc'ing Bryan since I think you suggested he might be interested. --b. diff --git a/fs/nfs/inode.c b/fs/nfs/inode.c index fe12037..b84748e 100644 --- a/fs/nfs/inode.c +++ b/fs/nfs/inode.c @@ -438,8 +438,13 @@ nfs_setattr(struct dentry *dentry, struct iattr *attr) if ((attr->ia_valid & (ATTR_MODE|ATTR_UID|ATTR_GID)) != 0) nfs_inode_return_delegation(inode); error = NFS_PROTO(inode)->setattr(dentry, fattr, attr); - if (error == 0) + if (error) + goto out_free; + if (attr->ia_valid & ATTR_FILE) + nfs_post_op_update_inode_force_wcc(inode, fattr); + else nfs_refresh_inode(inode, fattr); +out_free: nfs_free_fattr(fattr); out: return error; -- 1.7.5.4 -- 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
