SRU proposal for Wily (extended with fix to bug #1532722)
** Patch added: "wily_ifupdown_0.7.54ubuntu3.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ifupdown/+bug/1337873/+attachment/4548423/+files/wily_ifupdown_0.7.54ubuntu3.debdiff
--
You received this bug notification because you are
SRU proposal for Trusty (extended with fix to bug #1532722)
** Patch added: "trusty_ifupdown_0.7.47.2ubuntu4.3.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ifupdown/+bug/1337873/+attachment/4548422/+files/trusty_ifupdown_0.7.47.2ubuntu4.3.debdiff
--
You received this bug notification b
Since per-interface locking landed in Xenial, we've been getting
crashes, see bug 1532722. Until this is fixed, I'm marking this as
v-failed. We'll then need to update the SRU with this fix as well.
** Tags removed: verification-done
** Tags added: verification-failed
--
You received this bug no
I have verified both Trusty and Wily. The verification was automated
cyclic rebooting of a VM containing 3 NICs - 2 of them were used in
bonding in active-backup. Before the fix has been implemented this test
failed with some interfaces uninitialized or the bonding mode being
wrong (the default rou
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu Wily)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Changed in: ifenslave (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Changed in: ifenslave (Ubuntu Precise)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Changed in: ifenslave (Ubuntu Trusty)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
Hello Rafael, or anyone else affected,
Accepted ifupdown into wily-proposed. The package will build now and be
available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ifupdown/0.7.54ubuntu1.1 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https://
Hello Rafael, or anyone else affected,
Accepted ifenslave into trusty-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ifenslave/2.4ubuntu1.2 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
https:/
Hello Rafael, or anyone else affected,
Accepted ifupdown into trusty-proposed. The package will build now and
be available at
https://launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ifupdown/0.7.47.2ubuntu4.2 in a few
hours, and then in the -proposed repository.
Please help us by testing this new package. See
http
I sponsored the trusty and wily patches.
** Also affects: ifupdown (Ubuntu Wily)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu Vivid)
Status: Confirmed => Won't Fix
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu Wily)
Status: New => In Progress
** Changed in: ifupdo
Setting precise tasks to "wontfix", this is too complex to backport and
the bug is not nearly important enough to risk regressions due to too
invasive backports.
** Changed in: ifenslave (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: New => Won't Fix
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: Confi
This bug was fixed in the package ifupdown - 0.7.54ubuntu2
---
ifupdown (0.7.54ubuntu2) xenial; urgency=medium
* Per-interface hierarchical locking. Backported from Debian git head.
(LP: #1337873, Closes: #753755)
-- Dariusz Gadomski Thu, 10 Nov 2015
11:30:14 +0200
** Chang
(unsubscribing sponsors for now then, please subscribe them back after
getting some feedback from the xenial update)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ifupdown in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1337873
Sponsored the patch for xenial. Let's give this some maturing there
first.
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu)
Status: In Progress => Fix Committed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ifupdown in Ubuntu.
https
Adding SRU proposal for Xenial.
** Patch added: "xenial_ifupdown_0.7.54ubuntu2.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ifupdown/+bug/1337873/+attachment/4515989/+files/xenial_ifupdown_0.7.54ubuntu2.debdiff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
To
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu Precise)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu Trusty)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu Vivid)
Importance: Undecided => Medium
--
** Description changed:
[Impact]
- * A lack of proper synchronization in ifupdown causes a race condition
+ * Lack of proper synchronization in ifupdown causes a race condition
resulting in occasional incorrect network interface initialization (e.g.
in bonding case - wrong bonding setti
Adding SRU proposal for Trusty.
** Patch added: "trusty_ifupdown_0.7.47.2ubuntu4.2.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ifupdown/+bug/1337873/+attachment/4501799/+files/trusty_ifupdown_0.7.47.2ubuntu4.2.debdiff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of U
Adding SRU proposal for Trusty (to make ifenslave compatible with
ifupdown changes).
** Patch added: "trusty_ifenslave_2.4ubuntu1.2.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ifupdown/+bug/1337873/+attachment/4501800/+files/trusty_ifenslave_2.4ubuntu1.2.debdiff
--
You received this b
Adding SRU proposal for Vivid.
** Patch added: "vivid_ifupdown_0.7.48.1ubuntu11.debdiff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+source/ifupdown/+bug/1337873/+attachment/4501798/+files/vivid_ifupdown_0.7.48.1ubuntu11.debdiff
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Adding SRU proposal for wily.
** Description changed:
+ [Impact]
+
+ * A lack of proper synchronization in ifupdown causes a race condition
+ resulting in occasional incorrect network interface initialization (e.g.
+ in bonding case - wrong bonding settings, network unavailable because
+ slave<
Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu Vivid)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ifupdown in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.lau
Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu Precise)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ifupdown in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.l
Status changed to 'Confirmed' because the bug affects multiple users.
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu Trusty)
Status: New => Confirmed
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ifupdown in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.la
** Also affects: ifupdown (Ubuntu Vivid)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: ifupdown (Ubuntu Trusty)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
** Also affects: ifupdown (Ubuntu Precise)
Importance: Undecided
Status: New
--
You received this bug notification
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu)
Assignee: (unassigned) => Dariusz Gadomski (dgadomski)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ifupdown in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1337873
Title:
Precise, Trusty
** Changed in: ifupdown (Ubuntu)
Assignee: Rafael David Tinoco (inaddy) => (unassigned)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ifupdown in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1337873
Title:
Precise, Trusty
Im getting back to this after sometime. After the discussion was brought
to upstream we did not get feedback regarding proposed changes but
investigating further it is clear that ifupdown is suffering from race
conditions that cannot be solved simply by creating:
1) big lock - since its ifup/ifdow
** Tags added: cts
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ifupdown in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1337873
Title:
Precise, Trusty, Utopic - ifupdown initialization problems caused by
race condition
St
Discussing this with Foundations we concluded ifupdown should not only
lock "per-interface" basis, but it should have also a way of creating an
hierarchy of interfaces (which locking the master one would imply in all
slaves to be locked also - for vlan, aliases, bridging, etc) so in a
possible para
(unsubscribing ~ubuntu-sponsors per comment #13, please re-subscribe
when patches are ready)
--
You received this bug notification because you are a member of Ubuntu
Touch seeded packages, which is subscribed to ifupdown in Ubuntu.
https://bugs.launchpad.net/bugs/1337873
Title:
Precise, Trusty
After talking to Stéphane Graber, from Ubuntu Core Foundations Team, we
decided that I should implement independent locking for every interface
(like I have already proposed to Debian upstream project) and to
implement locking mechanisms for dependent interfaces inside the hooks.
So:
1) ifupdown
Checking Ubuntu bzr tree...
---
inaddy@trusty.00064811:/bugs/00064811/sources/bazaar/ubuntu/$ git clone
"bzr::lp:ubuntu/ifenslave"
Cloning into 'ifenslave'...
Most recent Ubuntu version: 3
Packaging branch version: 2.5ubuntu1
Packaging branch status: OUT-OF-DATE
Most recent Ubuntu version: 3
Pack
YES!
---
root@provisioned:~# pstree -a
...
├─ifup --allow auto eth2
│ └─sh -c run-parts /etc/network/if-pre-up.d
│ └─run-parts /etc/network/if-pre-up.d
│ └─ifenslave /etc/network/if-pre-up.d/ifenslave
│ └─sleep 0.1
---
One slave interface, eth2 in this case, got t
Lets try adding "bond-slaves" to the master interface and fixing
the "bond-primary" keyword:
---
root@provisioned:~# cat /etc/network/interfaces
# /etc/network/interfaces
auto lo
iface lo inet loopback
auto eth0
iface eth0 inet dhcp
auto eth1
iface eth1 inet manual
bond-master bond0
auto
And you can check that upstart got deadlocked:
---
root@provisioned:~# ps -ef | grep ifup
root 618 1 0 10:21 ?00:00:00 ifup --allow auto eth2
root 619 1 0 10:21 ?00:00:00 ifup --allow auto eth1
root 620 1 0 10:21 ?00:00:00 ifup --allow auto
Let's try everything again from the beggining but now with a fixed
ifupdown version (no race conditions between upstart and sysv scripts
). My interfaces file will be exactly the same as the one proposed for
ifenslave examples:
---
auto eth1
iface eth1 inet manual
bond-master bond0
auto eth2
I have introduced one big lock for ifupdown. The ifup, ifdown or ifquery
commands cannot be run simultaneously.
Since SEVERAL ifupdown pre/post scripts do need to make reentrant calls
do these commands I created on environment variable that disabled the
locking when reentrant calls are made to the
I have introduced one big lock for ifupdown. The ifup, ifdown or ifquery
commands cannot be run simultaneously.
Since SEVERAL ifupdown pre/post scripts do need to make reentrant calls
do these commands I created on environment variable that disabled the
locking when reentrant calls are made to the
CORRECT WAY OF SETTING INTERFACES FILE FOR BONDING:
1) This model has race conditions.
2) YOU HAVE to have both scripts running (networking and network-interfaces)
# /etc/network/interfaces
auto lo
iface lo inet loopback
auto eth0
iface eth0 inet dhcp
auto eth1
iface eth1 inet manual
bond-
** Description changed:
- It was brought to my attention (by others) that ifupdown runs into race
- conditions on some specific cases.
-
- [Impact]
-
- When trying to deploy many servers at once (higher chances of happening)
- or from time-to-time, like any other intermittent race-condition.
- I
** Description changed:
It was brought to my attention (by others) that ifupdown runs into race
conditions on some specific cases.
[Impact]
When trying to deploy many servers at once (higher chances of happening)
or from time-to-time, like any other intermittent race-condition.
I
This bug is being fixed upstream together with the developer. I'll
provide the fix here as soon as it gets accepted upstream:
https://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=753755
Thank you.
** Patch removed: "ifupdown_0.7.47.2ubuntu4.2~lp1337873.diff"
https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+s
42 matches
Mail list logo