From: Peter Staubach Subject: Re: [PATCH V2] make "noac" and "actimeo=0" work correctly Date: Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:24:26 -0400 Message-ID: <4877C17A.7000009@redhat.com> References: <484EE994.5030907@redhat.com> <487390EC.7080403@redhat.com> <76bd70e30807100858g58fbf454uc9331035a2bbf264@mail.gmail.com> <487649AE.1090909@redhat.com> <1215718184.7126.44.camel@localhost> <4877BF39.20102@redhat.com> <1215807540.17983.2.camel@localhost> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Cc: chucklever@gmail.com, NFS list To: Trond Myklebust Return-path: Received: from mx1.redhat.com ([66.187.233.31]:33427 "EHLO mx1.redhat.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1756399AbYGKUYo (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Jul 2008 16:24:44 -0400 In-Reply-To: <1215807540.17983.2.camel@localhost> Sender: linux-nfs-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Trond Myklebust wrote: > On Fri, 2008-07-11 at 16:14 -0400, Peter Staubach wrote: > >> Given that we seem to "own" time_in_range(), how about the >> attached patch which just modifies time_in_range() to calculate >> [b,c) instead of [b,c], removes the special case for attrtimeo==0 >> in nfs_attribute_timeout() and adds a comment that Chuck requested >> concerning the need to ensure that zero timeout values continue >> to work? >> > > I'm fine with that, but still suggest that you change the name in order > to avoid confusing possible out-of-tree users. Okie doke. I will introduce time_in_range_open(), retest, and then repost the patch. Unfortunately, modifying jiffies.h means pretty much a full kernel build instead of a small incremental build... :-( Thanx! ps