> On Dec 2, 2016, at 12:05, Anna Schumaker <schumaker.anna@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Trond,
>
> On 12/01/2016 05:06 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>> We don't need to ask for the change attribute when returning a delegation
>> or recovering from a server reboot, and it could actually cause us to
>> obtain an incorrect value if we're using a pNFS flavour that requires
>> LAYOUTCOMMIT.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c | 1 -
>> 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> index b582df89c083..c0628f78ed98 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfs/nfs4proc.c
>> @@ -226,7 +226,6 @@ static const u32 nfs4_pnfs_open_bitmap[3] = {
>>
>> static const u32 nfs4_open_noattr_bitmap[3] = {
>> FATTR4_WORD0_TYPE
>> - | FATTR4_WORD0_CHANGE
>
> Do these patches depend on another patch series? I'm having trouble applying this patch since my tree doesn't have FATTR4_WORD0_CHANGE yet. I'm having trouble with patch 4, too.
>
I’ve pushed out the linux-next branch http://git.linux-nfs.org/?p=trondmy/linux-nfs.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/heads/linux-next
> Thanks,
> Anna
>
>> | FATTR4_WORD0_FILEID,
>> };
��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��w��� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
