From: zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>
To: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
ebiederm@xmission.com, ja@ssi.bg, zhuyj <zyjzyj2000@gmail.com>,
"Yang, Zhangle (Eric)" <Zhangle.Yang@windriver.com>,
"Tao, Yue" <Yue.Tao@windriver.com>,
"Zadoyan, Grant" <Grant.Zadoyan@windriver.com>
Subject: Should linux send netlink message as it is deleting that routing entry?
Date: Thu, 10 Apr 2014 16:23:26 +0800 [thread overview]
Message-ID: <534654FE.3040804@gmail.com> (raw)
Hi, David
With ubuntu 12.04, I run the following to reproduce this defect.
1) Configure an interface
ifconfig eth1 150.0.0.1/24 up
2) Add routing entry via that interface address
route add -net 200.0.0.0/24 gw 150.0.0.1
3) Change the ip address on that interface as shown below.
ifconfig eth1 151.0.0.1/24 up
4) Check netlink messages with "ip monitor all". There is no route
delete netlink message.
[ADDR]Deleted 3: eth1 inet 150.0.0.1/24 brd 150.0.0.255 scope global eth1
[ROUTE]Deleted 150.0.0.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src
150.0.0.1
[ROUTE]Deleted broadcast 150.0.0.255 dev eth1 table local proto
kernel scope link src 150.0.0.1
[ROUTE]Deleted broadcast 150.0.0.0 dev eth1 table local proto kernel
scope link src 150.0.0.1
[ROUTE]Deleted local 150.0.0.1 dev eth1 table local proto kernel scope
host src 150.0.0.1
[NEIGH]224.0.0.251 dev eth1 lladdr 01:00:5e:00:00:fb NOARP
[NEIGH]224.0.0.22 dev eth1 lladdr 01:00:5e:00:00:16 NOARP
[ADDR]3: eth1 inet 151.0.0.1/16 brd 151.0.255.255 scope global eth1
[ROUTE]local 151.0.0.1 dev eth1 table local proto kernel scope host
src 151.0.0.1
[ROUTE]broadcast 151.0.255.255 dev eth1 table local proto kernel scope
link src 151.0.0.1
[ROUTE]151.0.0.0/16 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 151.0.0.1
[ROUTE]broadcast 151.0.0.0 dev eth1 table local proto kernel scope
link src 151.0.0.1
[ADDR]Deleted 3: eth1 inet 151.0.0.1/16 brd 151.0.255.255 scope
global eth1
[ROUTE]Deleted 151.0.0.0/16 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src
151.0.0.1
[ROUTE]Deleted broadcast 151.0.255.255 dev eth1 table local proto
kernel scope link src 151.0.0.1
[ROUTE]Deleted broadcast 151.0.0.0 dev eth1 table local proto kernel
scope link src 151.0.0.1
[ROUTE]Deleted local 151.0.0.1 dev eth1 table local proto kernel scope
host src 151.0.0.1
[NEIGH]224.0.0.22 dev eth1 lladdr 01:00:5e:00:00:16 NOARP
[ADDR]3: eth1 inet 151.0.0.1/24 brd 151.0.0.255 scope global eth1
[ROUTE]local 151.0.0.1 dev eth1 table local proto kernel scope host
src 151.0.0.1
[ROUTE]broadcast 151.0.0.255 dev eth1 table local proto kernel scope
link src 151.0.0.1
[ROUTE]151.0.0.0/24 dev eth1 proto kernel scope link src 151.0.0.1
[ROUTE]broadcast 151.0.0.0 dev eth1 table local proto kernel scope
link src 151.0.0.1
There is no netlink message to notify that 200.0.0.0/24 is deleted. But
in fact, this 200.0.0.0/24 route item disappears.
I checked the source code, and I found the following is the process to
delete static routes when the attached interface is deleted.
1) | fib_netdev_event() {
1) | fib_disable_ip() {
1) 1.284 us | fib_sync_down_dev();
1) | fib_flush() {
1) | fib_table_flush() {
1) 0.129 us | fib_release_info();
1) 0.351 us | fib_release_info();
1) 4.605 us | }
1) | fib_table_flush() {
1) 0.096 us | fib_release_info();
1) 0.255 us | fib_release_info();
1) 4.770 us | }
1) + 11.787 us | }
1) ! 315.273 us | }
1) ! 315.888 us | }
But there is no netlink message sent here.
Should linux send netlink message as it is deleting that 200.0.0.0/24
routing entry?
Best Regards!
Zhu Yanjun
next reply other threads:[~2014-04-10 8:23 UTC|newest]
Thread overview: 4+ messages / expand[flat|nested] mbox.gz Atom feed top
2014-04-10 8:23 zhuyj [this message]
2014-04-11 9:15 ` Should linux send netlink message as it is deleting that routing entry? zhuyj
2014-04-11 18:30 ` Stephen Hemminger
2014-04-16 10:50 ` zhuyj
Reply instructions:
You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:
* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
and reply-to-all from there: mbox
Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style
* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
switches of git-send-email(1):
git send-email \
--in-reply-to=534654FE.3040804@gmail.com \
--to=zyjzyj2000@gmail.com \
--cc=Grant.Zadoyan@windriver.com \
--cc=Yue.Tao@windriver.com \
--cc=Zhangle.Yang@windriver.com \
--cc=davem@davemloft.net \
--cc=ebiederm@xmission.com \
--cc=ja@ssi.bg \
--cc=netdev@vger.kernel.org \
/path/to/YOUR_REPLY
https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html
* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line
before the message body.
This is an external index of several public inboxes,
see mirroring instructions on how to clone and mirror
all data and code used by this external index.