This is an archived copy of the Xen.org mailing list, which we have preserved to ensure that existing links to archives are not broken. The live archive, which contains the latest emails, can be found at http://lists.xen.org/
Home Products Support Community News


RE: [Xen-devel] RE: new /etc/xen/network script

To: "Nivedita Singhvi" <nsnix@xxxxxxxxxxx>, "James Bulpin" <James.Bulpin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Subject: RE: [Xen-devel] RE: new /etc/xen/network script
From: "Ian Pratt" <m+Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 12:32:22 +0100
Cc: Ian Pratt <Ian.Pratt@xxxxxxxxxxxx>, xen-devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx, "Zhai, Edwin" <edwin.zhai@xxxxxxxxx>
Delivery-date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 11:30:32 +0000
Envelope-to: www-data@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
List-help: <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=help>
List-id: Xen developer discussion <xen-devel.lists.xensource.com>
List-post: <mailto:xen-devel@lists.xensource.com>
List-subscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=subscribe>
List-unsubscribe: <http://lists.xensource.com/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/xen-devel>, <mailto:xen-devel-request@lists.xensource.com?subject=unsubscribe>
Sender: xen-devel-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Thread-index: AcWjHdVaFDbrTU6sSo64UzNhIVNNIQAALnrg
Thread-topic: [Xen-devel] RE: new /etc/xen/network script
> One potential issue is the link set of peth0, which creates 
> an interface route for peth0, at least on my currently broken 
> box.  The ifup of eth0 (veth0) will try to add a duplicate 
> route for the primary subnet via eth0. Can't validate or test 
> any of the above since my box is crashing at boot, unrelated 
> issue, will dig into this tmrw further when I get onto a box..
> This in no way explains why having the del_addrs works for 
> him when it's prior to the link set up of peth0 (??), so this 
> isn't the fatal error.

No, I messed up the inclusion of Edwin's patch as I failed to understand
the root cause.
What I don't understand is why the link set up on peth0 causes an
address to appear. 

I thought it might be an old address from when it was eth0 getting
resurected, hence the line I added. I wander if 'ifconfig ${netdev} down' would work better?


> Would this make more sense: to have the route removal happen as so:
> --- network-bridge.orig 2005-08-17 03:38:13.000000000 -0700
> +++ network-bridge      2005-08-17 04:08:33.298424365 -0700
> @@ -197,6 +197,7 @@
>          ip link set ${bridge} up
>          ip link set vif0.0 up
>          ip link set p${netdev} up
> +       del_addrs p${netdev}
>          if ! ifup ${netdev} ; then
>                  if [ ${kip} ] ; then
>                          # use the addresses we grocked from 
> proc/cmdline
> Just for testing..
> signed-off-by Nivedita Singhvi niv#us.ibm.com
> thanks,
> Nivedita

Xen-devel mailing list