On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 01:10:20PM +0200, Hannes Reinecke wrote: > When looking up a path in the existing configuration it is perfectly > possible for the path not to be present. > This should not generate a message as it might be errorneously > interpreted as an error. > Do you feel really strongly that these messages should go? I don't think that they are essential, but they can be useful when debugging an issue to see the route the code took. We could move them to level 4, but personally, I find the amount of messages generated at log level 4 to be so high that it's a pain to use to track bugs that don't occur right away. Another possibility would be to change the message to something more innocuous. Thoughts? -Ben > Signed-off-by: Hannes Reinecke <hare@xxxxxxx> > --- > libmultipath/structs.c | 2 -- > 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-) > > diff --git a/libmultipath/structs.c b/libmultipath/structs.c > index b773d1c..39b2e05 100644 > --- a/libmultipath/structs.c > +++ b/libmultipath/structs.c > @@ -404,7 +404,6 @@ find_path_by_dev (vector pathvec, char * dev) > if (!strcmp(pp->dev, dev)) > return pp; > > - condlog(3, "%s: not found in pathvec", dev); > return NULL; > } > > @@ -421,7 +420,6 @@ find_path_by_devt (vector pathvec, char * dev_t) > if (!strcmp(pp->dev_t, dev_t)) > return pp; > > - condlog(3, "%s: not found in pathvec", dev_t); > return NULL; > } > > -- > 2.6.6 -- dm-devel mailing list dm-devel@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/dm-devel
