On Thu, 5 Nov 2015 14:54:17 -0500 Neil Horman <[email protected]> wrote:
> I found recently that, if I disabled address promotion in the kernel, that > ip addr flush dev <dev> > > would fail with an EADDRNOTAVAIL errno (though the flush operation would in > fact > flush all addresses from an interface properly) > > Whats happening is that, if I add a primary and multiple secondary addresses > to > an interface, the flush operation first ennumerates them all with a GETADDR | > DUMP operation, then sends a delete request for each address. But the kernel, > having promotion disabled, deletes all secondary addresses when the primary is > removed. That means, that several delete requests may still be pending in the > netlink request for addresses that have been removed on our behalf, resulting > in > EADDRNOTAVAIL return codes. > > It seems the simplest thing to do is to understand that EADDRUNAVAIL isn't a > fatal outcome on a flush operation, as it just indicates that an address which > you want to remove is already removed, so it can safely be ignored. > > Signed-off-by: Neil Horman <[email protected]> > CC: Stephen Hemminger <[email protected]> > CC: Alexey Kuznetsov <[email protected]> Applied, thanks -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe netdev" in the body of a message to [email protected] More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
