From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.0 (2014-02-07) on aws-us-west-2-korg-lkml-1.web.codeaurora.org X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-5.8 required=3.0 tests=BAYES_00,DKIM_SIGNED, DKIM_VALID,DKIM_VALID_AU,HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS,MAILING_LIST_MULTI, SPF_HELO_NONE,SPF_PASS,URIBL_BLOCKED autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.0 Received: from mail.kernel.org (mail.kernel.org [198.145.29.99]) by smtp.lore.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id CE33CC4338F for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 02:53:49 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lists.ozlabs.org (lists.ozlabs.org [112.213.38.117]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mail.kernel.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 0EA1C60F12 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 02:53:48 +0000 (UTC) DMARC-Filter: OpenDMARC Filter v1.4.1 mail.kernel.org 0EA1C60F12 Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; dmarc=none (p=none dis=none) header.from=stwcx.xyz Authentication-Results: mail.kernel.org; spf=pass smtp.mailfrom=lists.ozlabs.org Received: from boromir.ozlabs.org (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4GZw8W2qpMz3cRF for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 12:53:47 +1000 (AEST) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=stwcx.xyz header.i=@stwcx.xyz header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=qekAq3h9; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=IRAoWMup; dkim-atps=neutral Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; spf=pass (sender SPF authorized) smtp.mailfrom=stwcx.xyz (client-ip=64.147.123.20; helo=wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com; envelope-from=patrick@stwcx.xyz; receiver=) Authentication-Results: lists.ozlabs.org; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=stwcx.xyz header.i=@stwcx.xyz header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm2 header.b=qekAq3h9; dkim=pass (2048-bit key; unprotected) header.d=messagingengine.com header.i=@messagingengine.com header.a=rsa-sha256 header.s=fm3 header.b=IRAoWMup; dkim-atps=neutral Received: from wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com (wout4-smtp.messagingengine.com [64.147.123.20]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by lists.ozlabs.org (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4GZw7y4l93z2yy3 for ; Thu, 29 Jul 2021 12:53:18 +1000 (AEST) Received: from compute2.internal (compute2.nyi.internal [10.202.2.42]) by mailout.west.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3FD8F320084E; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 22:53:10 -0400 (EDT) Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute2.internal (MEProxy); Wed, 28 Jul 2021 22:53:10 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=stwcx.xyz; h= date:from:to:cc:subject:message-id:references:mime-version :content-type:in-reply-to; s=fm2; bh=+eabnmVyukOvPmsgJIAbs+/t4UA vERS8uSAuTcgDKoU=; b=qekAq3h9vHbOlsan983P9EnvtqCiHnCJKjZvSK6uZPe khSdtWCNy+Vk5/xW+RShEhbjoJIdAcBPlNxsDXfhETA39U4SEnwP60eVa3O1MQqb K750TNBxkhnSKo2dzUriMUsxNSN856/cQxBsI/OuKDgKcRKlYTXOP9BW9IDFm1Za T95n8xc53ZbSRn27p105FpKgy/tr0fPtcmV2tj6M2F/LuBErMrFHI/I5nI9B5sli egjGqJiDv0ibDqd0VuuEpMFLRhLOh2zCAJKnOYGgquhw0z20JM+P+gVBP6IY/Z8/ H+0O5SukQveXU0Z4+Tl8nzuYNGtfxIj2Qjzg4ueT87A== DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-proxy :x-me-proxy:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=+eabnm VyukOvPmsgJIAbs+/t4UAvERS8uSAuTcgDKoU=; b=IRAoWMupMcJo8KSD/Y7bE0 bCZa6rnoJyGb5Qv0ZFRCXE7Kaey9LXySWvzhwTptWr/Y50/KrVmlwWbuKMtEyCuj jzi0fl506X+xk+dWgchz3JUQocY6ySVgoeetbODnTAlAyJSQ+1fjoFZV/LB+ZXPc AWWdZEvtkGM3HhVtAf1fHQwjeimweGYXJEbEkMUNRGYYbDq41EwQrNhmvTJy48LJ fG5xpWfZNgI/Ea0Dq/f5IHykDXi5n0k+fcTHfDU+GYW58PkB8elo54o1vZEDZ9kJ JP4W+exKpeVhTLRIAyLSo/J2NlObeCcRJ5HawBemB6HvC3n8BSoZJrfDCV0SsXBw == X-ME-Sender: X-ME-Received: X-ME-Proxy-Cause: gggruggvucftvghtrhhoucdtuddrgedvtddrhedtgdehgecutefuodetggdotefrodftvf curfhrohhfihhlvgemucfhrghsthforghilhdpqfgfvfdpuffrtefokffrpgfnqfghnecu uegrihhlohhuthemuceftddtnecusecvtfgvtghiphhivghnthhsucdlqddutddtmdenfg hrlhcuvffnffculdejtddmnecujfgurhepfffhvffukfhfgggtuggjsehgtderredttddv necuhfhrohhmpefrrghtrhhitghkucghihhllhhirghmshcuoehprghtrhhitghksehsth iftgigrdighiiiqeenucggtffrrghtthgvrhhnpeehgfduffeugfehuedvgeekkeetheek jeejudegueevgedvuddtieekteefgefhheenucffohhmrghinhepohhpvghnsghmtgdqph hrohhjvggtthdrgiihiidpshhtrhhutghtuhhrvgguqdhlohhgghhinhhgrdhmugenucev lhhushhtvghrufhiiigvpedtnecurfgrrhgrmhepmhgrihhlfhhrohhmpehprghtrhhitg hksehsthiftgigrdighiii X-ME-Proxy:

Received: by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA; Wed, 28 Jul 2021 22:53:09 -0400 (EDT) Date: Wed, 28 Jul 2021 21:53:07 -0500 From: Patrick Williams To: Andrew Jeffery Subject: Re: `phosphor-logging` APIs (RFC) Message-ID: References: <41a334dd-56c4-44d0-b8f4-7ecdf5bfa5de@www.fastmail.com>

MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha256; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="IrO7M27xFVThdUCe" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: X-BeenThere: openbmc@lists.ozlabs.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: Development list for OpenBMC List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Cc: OpenBMC List Errors-To: openbmc-bounces+openbmc=archiver.kernel.org@lists.ozlabs.org Sender: "openbmc" --IrO7M27xFVThdUCe Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On Thu, Jul 29, 2021 at 09:04:14AM +0930, Andrew Jeffery wrote: > I've left a comment on the patch: >=20 > https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/phosphor-logging/+/45310/1/d= ocs/structured-logging.md#60 >=20 > But duplicating that here, how I'd like to use the API and what I'd=20 > like to see in the resulting journal message is: >=20 > ``` > value =3D "xyz.openbmc_project.EntityManager"; > lg2::error("Error talking to {ENTITY} error code is {ERRNO}", "ENTITY", v= alue, "ERRNO", 2); > ``` Thanks for the description. What you've proposed is at least able to be compiled and wouldn't increase the call-site code footprint at all. It wou= ld have more work in the [common] code that translates from the lg2 API format= to systemd, but it isn't outrageous and is fairly straight-forward to implement at this point. So far there are 3 approaches on the table: ``` a. Yours. error("Hit {ERROR} during {STAGE}.", "ERROR", "bad foobar", "STAGE", "baz-grae", "EXTRA", 123); -> MESSAGE=3D"Hit bad foobar during baz-grae." ERROR=3D"bad foobar" STAGE=3D"baz-grae" EXTRA=3D123 b. opt-in processing error("Hit error during processing.", "ERROR", primary, "bad foobar", "STAGE", primary, "baz-grae", "EXTRA", 123); -> MESSAGE=3D"Hit error during processing. ERROR=3Dbad foobar STAGE=3Dbaz-gr= ae" ERROR=3D"bad foobar" STAGE=3D"baz-grae" EXTRA=3D123 c. opt-out processing error("Hit error during processing.", "ERROR", "bad foobar", "STAGE", "baz-grae", "EXTRA", quiet, 123); -> MESSAGE=3D"Hit error during processing. ERROR=3Dbad foobar STAGE=3Dbaz-gr= ae" =20 ERROR=3D"bad foobar" = =20 STAGE=3D"baz-grae" = =20 EXTRA=3D123=20 ``` Based on my experience trying to apply lg2 to a reasonable sample[1], (b) seems rather verbose. We're going to end up with most developers just adding a `primary` on each data entry anyhow, so it is kind of pointless. Both (a) and (c) are relatively succinct. (a) has the advantage of being slightly more human-friendly, but at a disadvantage of worse performance and redundant tag identification (which cannot be checked at compile time eithe= r). (c) is faster, has no redundancy, and is consistently structured, but is slightly less human readable. My question would be is if (a) is really that much better from a human perspective to warrant the extra processing and redundancy (and thus potent= ial programming errors introduced by tag mismatches)? To me, (c) provides all = the same information with only minimal readability impact and certainly better performing. > Better yet would be if we could just forward the format string and=20 > journalctl renders this at invocation time, but we'd need to work with=20 > upstream on that. I kind of doubt they'd be interesting in absorbing this kind of string formatting into the library, but maybe I'm wrong. 1. https://gerrit.openbmc-project.xyz/c/openbmc/phosphor-virtual-sensor/+/4= 5353/1/virtualSensor.cpp=20 --=20 Patrick Williams --IrO7M27xFVThdUCe Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQIzBAABCAAdFiEEBGD9ii4LE9cNbqJBqwNHzC0AwRkFAmECGBEACgkQqwNHzC0A wRkzWQ//V6aGLPY0aPJplKs5DZBpq9SiI4CT7PGfGQcuVyP6Z8GMOX4rU9u4WogR FRkBK8mAeasQ1zxP31RGiwGQ3T6slU1D+UGeKW5pOdtxwN6fJTW1j8v+vNFCi/Fg Xr3XSIKGH8iBo+YaW+b1G8Bzob8js521guZlhDUu2rTeB2LnKTdmIDYq1qTg/O25 +l3GEslAaEl7B736qlanlaKSHuObiEkkQf5K9VFtvVMM591z7zM5OwF356Tp/5Go AsNXKP6VplDz0nJkAaOIqQZOFueO4R/IrvZZaUGm/UWZukMBA/nQSmTfzi/5XseG 9QkWcu0qWs7dQAcvlq1L2g7HSm/UKr2GjOpPSEszVCbT4Tgj+gCoTd+8zhMYhT4c WKUJhH83pCwOonSAiuRixm9A9OP7d+s5m2oEHeM7ZXyqh/am5znLY7dxDHHQJk1T vVdiu0tyPFvsofeVHTUmTYczALrlUckOGvhb8Fc5bA1OjN+m4vfcPAkPKGXMXBFT ctfIq1tQLXGl+QnQOiS2yD4oLQ3g45BTYWgz9F82TGNZ4jFBd1NfbjTWsycFYK6L Pvfir+sN+nuzk0bliGhIedyAQY7KnZ6XEeb/rim1xcfDfW43/c7qszIp+wiybw+l vWYLDrdA/LLcTWPC+YWPxI9lyFBEC/SoI5l7JKOT8mj9zR5hp7c= =3enG -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --IrO7M27xFVThdUCe--