Downgrade unknown SM.feature errors to warnings #6578
Conversation
Previously, encountering unknown features such as ATOMIC_PAUSE or SR_CACHING in SM.feature would trigger an error in xapi. However, these features can be used internally by SM and are not necessarily indicative of a misconfiguration. This change downgrades such cases from error to warning, allowing normal operation while still notifying the user that an unrecognized feature is present. Signed-off-by: Guillaume <[email protected]>
I don't really agree. It mitigates it at best. We're just shifting the problem from "errors are useless" towards "warnings are useless". That's a step forward, but not a fix. What about making SM and XAPI agree on what features are worth considering? |
|
Sorry, I misused the word "fixes". This warning is here to say that SM plugin is using a feature that is not recognized by the XAPI. It doesn't hurt but if the SM plugin wants to remove the warning it needs to move this feature somewhere else (not as capabilities). I think that we don't need to agree on things that is only used internally by SM plugin. We need to emit a warning to notify to SM plugin that the capabilities is not useful for XAPI. So I think that a warning is ok here and the ball is in the SM court now that can remove it if it doesn't use it or move it somewhere else in the code. |
Apparently, it was sufficient for GH to close the related issue, and I don't have enough power to reopen it. |
4 participants
Previously, encountering unknown features such as ATOMIC_PAUSE or SR_CACHING in SM.feature would trigger an error in xapi. However, these features can be used internally by SM and are not necessarily indicative of a misconfiguration.
This change downgrades such cases from error to warning to still notify the user that an unrecognized feature is present but can be expected. It fixes #5353.