Skip to content

Conversation

@lidel
Copy link
Member

@lidel lidel commented Oct 26, 2025

@MarcoPolo this seems to be a regression in 0.44. FYSA this is blocking Kubo 0.39, any chance we could have a patch with this or maybe 0.45 is soon enough (week-two?)


Log refactor done in

migrated from zap to slog but accidentally changed the log level for http.Server.ErrorLog from implicit INFO to explicit ERROR. This caused client EOF and TLS handshake errors to spam error logs and stdout in apps which log only ERROR by default.

These http.Server errors (client EOFs, TLS handshake failures from clients with naive TLS implementations, connection timeouts from clients that abort early) are normal operational noise, not actual server errors.

Rationale for using LevelDebug:

  • matches semantic meaning (similar to existing connection timeout logs)
  • respects user's configured threshold (all legacy software using both go-log and go-libp2p uses ERROR level by default and prints ERROR to stdout/err, users expected apps to filter this noise out)
  • allows users to enable for debugging via log level configuration

This PR helps with noise reported in:

#3364 migrated from zap to slog
but accidentally changed the log level for http.Server.ErrorLog from
implicit INFO to explicit ERROR. This caused client EOF and TLS handshake
errors to spam error logs and stdout in apps which log only ERROR by
default.

These http.Server errors (client EOFs, TLS handshake failures from clients
with naive TLS implementations, connection timeouts from clients that abort
early) are normal operational noise, not actual server errors. Using
LevelDebug:
- matches semantic meaning (similar to existing connection timeout logs)
- respects user's configured threshold (default ERROR filters them out)
- allows users to enable for debugging via log level configuration

Fixes ipfs/kubo#11027
Fixes ipfs/kubo#11033
@lidel lidel requested a review from MarcoPolo October 26, 2025 00:12
@lidel lidel marked this pull request as ready for review October 26, 2025 00:12
@lidel lidel mentioned this pull request Oct 26, 2025
66 tasks
Copy link
Collaborator

@MarcoPolo MarcoPolo left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Sorry for the noise!

We can ship a patch release with this

@MarcoPolo MarcoPolo merged commit 7b78dd6 into master Oct 28, 2025
10 of 12 checks passed
@lidel
Copy link
Member Author

lidel commented Nov 3, 2025

@MarcoPolo thank you i'll try to review #3419 today/tomorrow and we likely want to wait for a release with both.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants