From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: David Miller Subject: Re: [PATCH net-next 3/3] mlxsw: Add extack messages for port_{un,}split failures? Date: Tue, 05 Jun 2018 11:05:05 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <20180605.110505.1457307344721494012.davem@davemloft.net> References: <20180605080528.GA2034@splinter.mtl.com> <20180605081836.GD2164@nanopsycho> <41305b81-34ae-7ccf-a309-e66c4ed9bcbb@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Cc: jiri@resnulli.us, idosch@idosch.org, dsahern@kernel.org, netdev@vger.kernel.org, idosch@mellanox.com, jiri@mellanox.com, jakub.kicinski@netronome.com To: dsahern@gmail.com Return-path: Received: from shards.monkeyblade.net ([184.105.139.130]:37400 "EHLO shards.monkeyblade.net" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1751572AbeFEPFJ (ORCPT ); Tue, 5 Jun 2018 11:05:09 -0400 In-Reply-To: <41305b81-34ae-7ccf-a309-e66c4ed9bcbb@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: From: David Ahern Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 07:58:44 -0700 > On 6/5/18 1:18 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote: >> Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 10:05:28AM CEST, idosch@idosch.org wrote: >>> On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 09:52:30AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote: >>>> Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 12:15:03AM CEST, dsahern@kernel.org wrote: >>>>> if (!mlxsw_sp_port->split) { >>>>> netdev_err(mlxsw_sp_port->dev, "Port wasn't split\n"); >>>>> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Port was not split"); >>>> >>>> I wonder if we need the dmesg for these as well. Plus it is not the same >>>> (wasn't/was not) which is maybe confusing. Any objection against the >>>> original dmesg messages removal? >>> >>> We had this discussion about three months ago and decided to keep the >>> existing messages: >>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=151982813309466&w=2 >> >> I forgot. Thanks for reminding me. So could we at least have the >> messages 100% same? Thanks. >> > > ok if I convert the current message to 'was not' and avoid the > contraction in messages? Sure.