From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: zhuyj Subject: Re: Should linux send netlink message as it is deleting that routing entry? Date: Fri, 11 Apr 2014 17:15:48 +0800 Message-ID: <5347B2C4.6040103@gmail.com> References: <534654FE.3040804@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit To: netdev@vger.kernel.org, "David S. Miller" , ebiederm@xmission.com, ja@ssi.bg, "Yang, Zhangle (Eric)" , "Tao, Yue" , "Zadoyan, Grant" , eric.dumazet@gmail.com, socketcan@hartkopp.net, hannes@stressinduktion.org, cwang@twopensource.com, zhuyj Return-path: Received: from mail-qa0-f43.google.com ([209.85.216.43]:37012 "EHLO mail-qa0-f43.google.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK) by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id S1750805AbaDKJPu (ORCPT ); Fri, 11 Apr 2014 05:15:50 -0400 Received: by mail-qa0-f43.google.com with SMTP id j15so5044872qaq.2 for ; Fri, 11 Apr 2014 02:15:49 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <534654FE.3040804@gmail.com> Sender: netdev-owner@vger.kernel.org List-ID: Hi, all Please help to look at this problem. And give us an official explanation. Should linux send netlink message as it is deleting that routing entry? Thanks a lot. Zhu Yanjun On 04/10/2014 04:23 PM, zhuyj wrote: > 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 > >