Subject: [nfsv4] [PATCH] No reason for LAYOUTERROR to have an opaque payload

From: Thomas Haynes <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 08:30:02 -0700

From: Tom Haynes <[email-masked]>

When the error code was handled in the layout return, we needed the
opaque payload to allow for the different layout types to specify
their own payloads.

As we now have our own procedure, there is no need for an opaque
payload.

Signed-off-by: Tom Haynes <[email-masked]>
---
 nfsv42_middle_op_layouterror.xml | 1 -
 1 file changed, 1 deletion(-)

diff --git a/nfsv42_middle_op_layouterror.xml b/nfsv42_middle_op_layouterror.xml
index 526be06..688fde0 100644
--- a/nfsv42_middle_op_layouterror.xml
+++ b/nfsv42_middle_op_layouterror.xml
@@ -3,7 +3,6 @@
 
 <section anchor='op:layouterror' title='Operation 64: LAYOUTERROR - Provide Errors for the Layout'>
   <section toc='exclude' title="ARGUMENT">
-    <?rfc include='autogen/type_layoutupdate4.xml'?>
     <?rfc include='autogen/type_device_error.xml'?>
     <?rfc include='autogen/layouterror_args.xml'?>
   </section>
-- 
1.9.3

---

From: Benny Halevy <[email-masked]>
Date: Tue, 10 Jun 2014 15:01:57 -0400

> Signed-off-by: Tom Haynes <[email-masked]>

Makes sense.

Benny