From 99f88726381f676bba6e7dcf74b7412857d7946a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: "J. Bruce Fields" Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 15:12:27 -0500 Subject: [PATCH] nfsd: clarify exclusive create bitmask result. The use of |= is confusing--the bitmask is always initialized to zero in this case, so we're effectively just doing an assignment here. Signed-off-by: J. Bruce Fields --- fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c | 8 +++++--- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c index 9fa60a3ad48c..85b9a084177a 100644 --- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c +++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4proc.c @@ -103,11 +103,13 @@ do_open_lookup(struct svc_rqst *rqstp, struct svc_fh *current_fh, struct nfsd4_o (u32 *)open->op_verf.data, &open->op_truncate, &created); - /* If we ever decide to use different attrs to store the - * verifier in nfsd_create_v3, then we'll need to change this + /* + * Following rfc 3530 14.2.16, use the returned bitmask + * to indicate which attributes we used to store the + * verifier: */ if (open->op_createmode == NFS4_CREATE_EXCLUSIVE && status == 0) - open->op_bmval[1] |= (FATTR4_WORD1_TIME_ACCESS | + open->op_bmval[1] = (FATTR4_WORD1_TIME_ACCESS | FATTR4_WORD1_TIME_MODIFY); } else { status = nfsd_lookup(rqstp, current_fh, -- 2.20.1