Skip to content

Conversation

@mangelajo
Copy link
Contributor

The logging parameters were set for structured logging (InfoS) in
some cases, while Infof is being used (same for Errorf).

Closes: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/USHIFT-263

Which issue(s) this PR addresses:

Closes #

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot requested review from sallyom and zshi-redhat August 10, 2022 11:39
@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. label Aug 10, 2022
@zshi-redhat
Copy link
Contributor

zshi-redhat commented Aug 10, 2022

changes look good to me.

@mangelajo nit: since this is about log change, do you think it is worth adding some debug level log that can be enabled for development testing? one example is I had to add debug all the way down to the server.go handlemDNSPacket to see whether the answer (responder.Answer) is non-zero when debugging the issue: #833

@mangelajo
Copy link
Contributor Author

I'm good with that but let's do it in a separate PR. This is about fixing the bug which has been around for a shameful amount of time I don't want to recognize at this time %).

@mangelajo
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ggiguash @zshi-redhat does it look ok to lgtm ? I will be PTO after today.

@mangelajo mangelajo requested a review from ggiguash August 11, 2022 09:09
Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Should we capitalize the first word (Starting) to make is consistent with other messages?

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

ips -> IP addresses
or
IPs

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

It's an error, so should we say something like the following?
Failed waiting for...

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

semicolon missing? "found: %s"

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

We may want to be consistent about mDNS messages prefix: "mDNS: ..." or "mDNS ..."

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Done.

@mangelajo
Copy link
Contributor Author

Good feedback @ggiguash let me handle it :)

The logging parameters were set for structured logging (InfoS) in
some cases, while Infof is being used (same for Errorf).

Closes: https://issues.redhat.com/browse/USHIFT-263
@mangelajo
Copy link
Contributor Author

@ggiguash done :)

@ggiguash
Copy link
Contributor

/lgtm

@openshift-ci openshift-ci bot added the lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged. label Aug 11, 2022
@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 11, 2022

[APPROVALNOTIFIER] This PR is APPROVED

This pull-request has been approved by: ggiguash, mangelajo

The full list of commands accepted by this bot can be found here.

The pull request process is described here

Details Needs approval from an approver in each of these files:

Approvers can indicate their approval by writing /approve in a comment
Approvers can cancel approval by writing /approve cancel in a comment

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 2 against base HEAD 9466daf and 8 for PR HEAD b2e67d0 in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 1 against base HEAD 9466daf and 7 for PR HEAD b2e67d0 in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 2 against base HEAD b10d3c8 and 6 for PR HEAD b2e67d0 in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 1 against base HEAD b10d3c8 and 5 for PR HEAD b2e67d0 in total

@mangelajo
Copy link
Contributor Author

/retest

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 2 against base HEAD e6980e2 and 4 for PR HEAD b2e67d0 in total

@openshift-ci-robot
Copy link

/retest-required

Remaining retests: 1 against base HEAD e6980e2 and 3 for PR HEAD b2e67d0 in total

@openshift-ci
Copy link
Contributor

openshift-ci bot commented Aug 11, 2022

@mangelajo: all tests passed!

Full PR test history. Your PR dashboard.

Details

Instructions for interacting with me using PR comments are available here. If you have questions or suggestions related to my behavior, please file an issue against the kubernetes/test-infra repository. I understand the commands that are listed here.

@openshift-merge-robot openshift-merge-robot merged commit bd6e3e6 into openshift:main Aug 11, 2022
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

approved Indicates a PR has been approved by an approver from all required OWNERS files. lgtm Indicates that a PR is ready to be merged.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants