On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 12:33:00PM +0100, Paul Menzel wrote:
> Dear Linux folks,
>
>
> Am 12.03.21 um 12:28 schrieb Paul Menzel:
> >By default, using `printk()`, Linux logs messages with level warning,
> >which leaves the user seeing
> >
> > NFSD: Using UMH upcall client tracking operations.
> >
> >what to do about it. Reading `nfsd4_umh_cltrack_init()`, the message is
> >actually logged on success, so nothing needs to be done, and the info
> >level should be used.
> >
> >Cc: linux-nfs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> >Signed-off-by: Paul Menzel <pmenzel@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> >---
> > fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c | 2 +-
> > 1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
> >
> >diff --git a/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c b/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c
> >index 891395c6c7d3..db66c45a6b97 100644
> >--- a/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c
> >+++ b/fs/nfsd/nfs4recover.c
> >@@ -1864,7 +1864,7 @@ nfsd4_umh_cltrack_init(struct net *net)
> > ret = nfsd4_umh_cltrack_upcall("init", NULL, grace_start, NULL);
> > kfree(grace_start);
> > if (!ret)
> >- printk("NFSD: Using UMH upcall client tracking operations.\n");
> >+ pr_info("NFSD: Using UMH upcall client tracking operations.\n");
> > return ret;
> > }
>
> A debug-level message could also be used, or the line totally
> removed, and the condition be changed to print an error in case of
> failure. I am wondering about the benefit for the user reading
> through the logs. Maybe the log was only there, because UMH upcall
> client tracking operations were something new?
Could be.
I think debug-level would be fine.
--b.
