On Tue, 2017-02-07 at 14:44 -0800, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 07, 2017 at 01:17:46PM +0000, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > + if (orig->se_lun_acl != NULL) {
> > + pr_warn_ratelimited("Detected existing explicit"
> > + " se_lun_acl->se_lun_group reference for %s"
> > + " mapped_lun: %llu, ignoring\n",
> > + nacl->initiatorname, mapped_lun);
>
> The ignoring in the message confused the heck out of me first. But it
> seems that's just an incorrect leftover from the original message, as the
> changelog also says fail instead. With that fixed up (and maybe the
> whole message in a single string literal on a single line):
>
Fixed up the message to use 'failed'.
