I'm not sure what a better wording would be. Perhaps something like the following?
CFM fault status changed from [] to [rdi interval]. The brakets make it clear that it's a list. Ethan On Thu, Jul 19, 2012 at 8:12 PM, Ben Pfaff <b...@nicira.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jul 18, 2012 at 09:10:59PM -0700, Ethan Jackson wrote: >> This patch makes a two improvements to CFM logging which should >> make debugging connectivity problems a more intuitive. First, when >> a remote_mp disappears, the length of time since its last CCM >> reception is logged. Second, the "CFM fault status changed" >> message is reformatted in a more intuitive way. Instead of >> prefixing additions and deletions with pluses and minuses, the full >> old fault status and new fault status are logged. >> >> Requested-by: Ben Basler <bbas...@nicira.com>, >> Signed-off-by: Ethan Jackson <et...@nicira.com> > > I think this goes back to our dinnertime discussion where I was saying > that diffs are easy to read and Rajiv was saying he didn't understand > them ;-) > > The only possible issue that I see here is that: > CFM fault status changed: (old:) (new: recv) > and > CFM fault status changed: (old: recv) (new:) > both seem rather badly phrased. _______________________________________________ dev mailing list dev@openvswitch.org http://openvswitch.org/mailman/listinfo/dev
