> On Dec 5, 2016, at 15:28, Anna Schumaker <schumaker.anna@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi Trond,
>
> On 12/04/2016 06:10 PM, Trond Myklebust wrote:
>> We should only care about checking the attributes if the page cache
>> is marked as dubious (using NFS_INO_REVAL_PAGECACHE) and the
>> NFS_INO_REVAL_FORCED flag is set.
>>
>> Signed-off-by: Trond Myklebust <trond.myklebust@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
>> ---
>> fs/nfs/file.c | 5 ++++-
>> 1 file changed, 4 insertions(+), 1 deletion(-)
>>
>> diff --git a/fs/nfs/file.c b/fs/nfs/file.c
>> index 9ea85ae23c32..64c11f399b3d 100644
>> --- a/fs/nfs/file.c
>> +++ b/fs/nfs/file.c
>> @@ -102,8 +102,11 @@ static int nfs_revalidate_file_size(struct inode *inode, struct file *filp)
>> {
>> struct nfs_server *server = NFS_SERVER(inode);
>> struct nfs_inode *nfsi = NFS_I(inode);
>> + const unsigned long force_reval = NFS_INO_REVAL_PAGECACHE|NFS_INO_REVAL_FORCED;
>
> Would it make sense to declare this in a header file somewhere, rather than repeating this in file.c and inode.c? (and any other places we might need to "force_reval" in the future?)
I have some ideas for some cleanups that should help clear up the situation with the attribute cache. I’ll see if I get round to them this week.
Cheers
Trond��.n��������+%������w��{.n�����{��w��� jg��� �����ݢj����G���� ���j:+v���w�m������w�������h�����٥
