From: David Ahern <dsah...@gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 5 Jun 2018 07:58:44 -0700
> On 6/5/18 1:18 AM, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>> Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 10:05:28AM CEST, ido...@idosch.org wrote:
>>> On Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 09:52:30AM +0200, Jiri Pirko wrote:
>>>> Tue, Jun 05, 2018 at 12:15:03AM CEST, dsah...@kernel.org wrote:
>>>>> if (!mlxsw_sp_port->split) {
>>>>> netdev_err(mlxsw_sp_port->dev, "Port wasn't split\n");
>>>>> + NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack, "Port was not split");
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if we need the dmesg for these as well. Plus it is not the same
>>>> (wasn't/was not) which is maybe confusing. Any objection against the
>>>> original dmesg messages removal?
>>>
>>> We had this discussion about three months ago and decided to keep the
>>> existing messages:
>>> https://marc.info/?l=linux-netdev&m=151982813309466&w=2
>>
>> I forgot. Thanks for reminding me. So could we at least have the
>> messages 100% same? Thanks.
>>
>
> ok if I convert the current message to 'was not' and avoid the
> contraction in messages?
Sure.
