+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1246794 +++ GF_LOG_NONE (0) which was inadvertently used causing https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1246728 Shouldn't GF_LOG_NONE mean "Never log this"? If so, it's not being tested for and is, instead, treated as a higher priority than CRITICAL thus is always logged. --- Additional comment from Anand Avati on 2015-07-29 14:20:19 EDT --- REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/11797 (logging : GF_LOG_NONE logs always) posted (#1) for review on master by Mohamed Ashiq Liyazudeen (mliyazud) --- Additional comment from Anand Avati on 2015-07-29 15:13:41 EDT --- REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/11797 (logging : GF_LOG_NONE logs always) posted (#2) for review on master by Mohamed Ashiq Liyazudeen (mliyazud) --- Additional comment from Anand Avati on 2015-07-30 06:32:31 EDT --- REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/11797 (logging : GF_LOG_NONE logs always) posted (#3) for review on master by Mohamed Ashiq Liyazudeen (mliyazud) --- Additional comment from Anand Avati on 2015-08-05 03:18:20 EDT --- REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/11797 (logging : GF_LOG_NONE logs always) posted (#4) for review on master by Mohamed Ashiq Liyazudeen (mliyazud) --- Additional comment from Raghavendra Talur on 2015-08-07 15:35:41 EDT --- The enum, gf_level_strings is used for two things a. Admin perspective - Messages with what log level and above the admin is interested in. In this case GF_LOG_NONE means admin wants gluster to never log. b. Developer perspective - At what level this particular message should be logged at. In this case, GF_LOG_NONE has *no* meaning. Why would a developer call gf_msg and say take this message but don't log it. The original bug was because we did call gf_msg in one place with log_level of NONE and it was fixed with http://review.gluster.org/#/c/11760. I would suggest that the only change we do is to only change logic in logging.c to do a special check for GF_LOG_NONE used by a developer for a message and skip that log message Or rather log at GF_LOG_DEBUG complaining that gf_msg is called with GF_LOG_NONE and should never be done. --- Additional comment from Joe Julian on 2015-08-07 16:17:16 EDT --- I can see that. If that's what's done, there needs to be an integration test along with that which fails if the complaint that gf_msg is called with GF_LOG_NONE (or GF_LOG_ZERO or GF_LOG_UNDEF or whatever) --- Additional comment from Anand Avati on 2015-08-13 06:24:09 EDT --- REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/11797 (logging : GF_LOG_NONE logs always) posted (#5) for review on master by Mohamed Ashiq Liyazudeen (mliyazud) --- Additional comment from Anand Avati on 2015-09-01 07:37:33 EDT --- REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/11797 (logging : GF_LOG_NONE logs always) posted (#6) for review on master by Raghavendra Talur (rtalur) --- Additional comment from Anand Avati on 2015-09-01 08:58:43 EDT --- COMMIT: http://review.gluster.org/11797 committed in master by Jeff Darcy (jdarcy) ------ commit 7b390983768e833a8df15b994038155c53d71bdd Author: Mohamed Ashiq <mliyazud> Date: Wed Jul 29 23:47:34 2015 +0530 logging : GF_LOG_NONE logs always Shouldn't GF_LOG_NONE mean "Never log this"? If so, it's not being tested for and is, instead, treated as a higher priority than CRITICAL thus is always logged. Change-Id: Icad1e02a720a05ff21bd54ebf19c0032e6d5ce03 BUG: 1246794 Signed-off-by: Mohamed Ashiq <mliyazud> Reviewed-on: http://review.gluster.org/11797 Reviewed-by: Raghavendra Talur <rtalur> Tested-by: NetBSD Build System <jenkins.org>
REVIEW: http://review.gluster.org/12087 (logging : GF_LOG_NONE logs always) posted (#3) for review on release-3.7 by Raghavendra Talur (rtalur)
COMMIT: http://review.gluster.org/12087 committed in release-3.7 by Niels de Vos (ndevos) ------ commit b7d43986eb33811071173d394b5778bede6188c1 Author: Mohamed Ashiq <mliyazud> Date: Wed Jul 29 23:47:34 2015 +0530 logging : GF_LOG_NONE logs always Shouldn't GF_LOG_NONE mean "Never log this"? If so, it's not being tested for and is, instead, treated as a higher priority than CRITICAL thus is always logged. Backport of http://review.gluster.org/11797 Cherry picked from 7b390983768e833a8df15b994038155c53d71bdd >Change-Id: Icad1e02a720a05ff21bd54ebf19c0032e6d5ce03 >BUG: 1246794 >Signed-off-by: Mohamed Ashiq <mliyazud> >Reviewed-on: http://review.gluster.org/11797 >Reviewed-by: Raghavendra Talur <rtalur> >Tested-by: NetBSD Build System <jenkins.org> Change-Id: Icad1e02a720a05ff21bd54ebf19c0032e6d5ce03 BUG: 1259167 Signed-off-by: Mohamed Ashiq <mliyazud> Reviewed-on: http://review.gluster.org/12087 Tested-by: NetBSD Build System <jenkins.org> Reviewed-by: Raghavendra Talur <rtalur> Tested-by: Gluster Build System <jenkins.com> Reviewed-by: Niels de Vos <ndevos>
This bug is getting closed because a release has been made available that should address the reported issue. In case the problem is still not fixed with glusterfs-3.7.6, please open a new bug report. glusterfs-3.7.6 has been announced on the Gluster mailinglists [1], packages for several distributions should become available in the near future. Keep an eye on the Gluster Users mailinglist [2] and the update infrastructure for your distribution. [1] http://www.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-users/2015-November/024359.html [2] http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.comp.file-systems.gluster.user