pkg/policy: Consistently use logrus fields #1834
Merged
Conversation
This file contains bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
nebril
requested changes
Oct 24, 2017
pkg/policy/consumer.go
Outdated
| @@ -259,25 +280,29 @@ func (c *Consumable) AllowConsumerLocked(cache *ConsumableCache, id NumericIdent | |||
| // consumers map and the given consumable to the given consumer's consumers map. | |||
| // Must be called with Consumable mutex Locked. | |||
| func (c *Consumable) AllowConsumerAndReverseLocked(cache *ConsumableCache, id NumericIdentity) { | |||
| log.Debugf("Allowing direction %d -> %d", id, c.ID) | |||
| scopedLog := log.WithFields(log.Fields{ | |||
| logfields.Identity + ".from": c.ID, | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Original message specified opposite direction: id -> c.ID.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Oops! so it did. Fixed.
pkg/policy/consumer.go
Outdated
| c.AllowConsumerLocked(cache, id) | ||
|
|
||
| if reverse := cache.Lookup(id); reverse != nil { | ||
| log.Debugf("Allowing reverse direction %d -> %d", c.ID, id) | ||
| scopedLog.Debug("Allowing reverse direction") |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This message will have the same from and to fields, but the direction is opposite, so I think they should be swapped here.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, I remember thinking "well, it says reverse, so I should show the un-reverse" but the old message had them in the other order. I'll fix it.
raybejjani
added
area/daemon
raybejjani
force-pushed
the
policy-log-with-fields
branch
from
f57cc86
to
55c252c
Compare
|
@nebril A little uglier than before, but it's explicit. :) Please take another look. |
raybejjani
force-pushed
the
policy-log-with-fields
branch
from
55c252c
to
6d92d41
Compare
nebril
approved these changes
Oct 25, 2017
Signed-off-by: Ray Bejjani <ray@covalent.io>
raybejjani
force-pushed
the
policy-log-with-fields
branch
from
f81d891
to
6cd05cc
Compare
|
@tgraf rebased |
tgraf
approved these changes
Oct 26, 2017
gandro
added a commit
to gandro/cilium
that referenced
this pull request
Dec 7, 2023
…3-09-14 main-ce: Sync with upstream main branch 2023-09-14
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
This switches a bunch of log callsites to use logrus.WIthFields. These changes are not supposed to break anything and follow the same reasoning from #1801 The goal of these changes is to make debugging via logs easier by making our usage more consistent. Ideally, field names should be used the same way throughout the code and mean the same thing.
The most important things to review are whether the field names make sense in the context they're used, and whether we should introduce new ones to pkg/logfields/logfields.go. I'm also happy to incorporate better messages into this PR :)