> 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