| Message ID | 52C51C1E.9040603@huawei.com |
|---|---|
| State | RFC, archived |
| Delegated to: | David Miller |
| Headers | show |
On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 03:58:22PM +0800, chenweilong wrote: > On 2014/1/2 14:54, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > > On Thu, Jan 02, 2014 at 01:48:46PM +0800, chenweilong wrote: > >> On 2013/12/31 11:57, Hannes Frederic Sowa wrote: > >>> On Wed, Jun 19, 2013 at 11:05:32PM -0700, David Miller wrote: > >>>> From: Gao feng <gaofeng@cn.fujitsu.com> > >>>> Date: Sun, 16 Jun 2013 11:14:30 +0800 > >>>> > >>>>> If we disable all of the net interfaces, and enable > >>>>> un-lo interface before lo interface, we already allocated > >>>>> the addrconf dst in ipv6_add_addr. So we shouldn't allocate > >>>>> it again when we enable lo interface. > >>>>> > >>>>> Otherwise the message below will be triggered. > >>>>> unregister_netdevice: waiting for sit1 to become free. Usage count = 1 > >>>>> > >>>>> This problem is introduced by commit 25fb6ca4ed9cad72f14f61629b68dc03c0d9713f > >>>>> "net IPv6 : Fix broken IPv6 routing table after loopback down-up" > >>>>> > >>>>> Signed-off-by: Gao feng <gaofeng@cn.fujitsu.com> > >>>> > >>>> This is the second such regression added by that commit :-/ > >>>> > >>>> Applied and queue up for -stable, thanks. > >>> > >>> Hmm, and this change also has a regression and breaks the original fix. :/ > >>> > >>> https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=67951 > >>> > >>> I tried to track it down but it seems pretty complicated. Maybe we have to > >>> special-case the take-down of the loopback device. > >>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >> When I did the tests,If 'ifconfig lo down',all IPv6 connection broken, > >> but IPv4 connection were still OK. > >> > >> Is it designed like that or a bug? > > > > This seems to solve the loopback up/down problem, but there are still > > some issues with up/down of interfaces and routing table interactions. > > > > We enable routes over interfaces when interface is actually down and > > kick manually specified on-link routes when we actually should try to > > keep them and just disable them. > > > > diff --git a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c > > index 6c16345..61d752a 100644 > > --- a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c > > +++ b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c > > @@ -2629,8 +2629,10 @@ static void init_loopback(struct net_device *dev) > > if (sp_ifa->flags & (IFA_F_DADFAILED | IFA_F_TENTATIVE)) > > continue; > > > > - if (sp_ifa->rt) > > + if (sp_ifa->rt) { > > + ip6_ins_rt(sp_ifa->rt); > > continue; > > + } > > > > sp_rt = addrconf_dst_alloc(idev, &sp_ifa->addr, false); > > > > > > . > > > I test the patch,it has the problem Gao feng reported. Thanks for testing. I wonder why. > How about this: > > diff --git a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c > index d5fa5b8..5e2db6e 100644 > --- a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c > +++ b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c > @@ -2609,10 +2609,13 @@ static void init_loopback(struct net_device *dev) > > if (sp_ifa->flags & (IFA_F_DADFAILED | IFA_F_TENTATIVE)) > continue; > > - if (sp_ifa->rt) > - continue; > + if (sp_ifa->rt && sp_ifa->rt->dst.dev == dev){ > + ip6_del_rt(sp_ifa->rt); > + } > It could work, but it looks like a band-aid for another problem to me. I am not sure if it is in init_loopback, yet. -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
diff --git a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c index d5fa5b8..5e2db6e 100644 --- a/net/ipv6/addrconf.c +++ b/net/ipv6/addrconf.c @@ -2609,10 +2609,13 @@ static void init_loopback(struct net_device *dev) if (sp_ifa->flags & (IFA_F_DADFAILED | IFA_F_TENTATIVE)) continue; - if (sp_ifa->rt) - continue; + if (sp_ifa->rt && sp_ifa->rt->dst.dev == dev){ + ip6_del_rt(sp_ifa->rt); + } sp_rt = addrconf_dst_alloc(idev, &sp_ifa->addr, false); /* Failure cases are ignored */