From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([209.51.188.92]:55903) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h3HW8-0003dK-JS for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 05:46:46 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h3HW7-0004lC-VH for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 05:46:44 -0400 Received: from mail-wr1-x42b.google.com ([2a00:1450:4864:20::42b]:45424) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.0:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:16) (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1h3HW7-0004k7-N1 for qemu-devel@nongnu.org; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 05:46:43 -0400 Received: by mail-wr1-x42b.google.com with SMTP id o7so4254305wrp.12 for ; Mon, 11 Mar 2019 02:46:43 -0700 (PDT) Date: Mon, 11 Mar 2019 09:46:39 +0000 From: Stefan Hajnoczi Message-ID: <20190311094639.GA5991@stefanha-x1.localdomain> References: <40280F65B1B0B44E8089ED31C01616EBA3947B1A@dggeml529-mbx.china.huawei.com> <20190306100646.GI22159@stefanha-x1.localdomain> <40280F65B1B0B44E8089ED31C01616EBA394CD10@dggeml529-mbx.china.huawei.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/signed; micalg=pgp-sha1; protocol="application/pgp-signature"; boundary="vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd" Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <40280F65B1B0B44E8089ED31C01616EBA394CD10@dggeml529-mbx.china.huawei.com> Subject: Re: [Qemu-devel] Question about VM inner route entry's lost when vhost-user reconnect List-Id: List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , To: "Lilijun (Jerry, Cloud Networking)" Cc: "qemu-devel@nongnu.org" , "wangxin (U)" , wangyunjian --vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline On Fri, Mar 08, 2019 at 02:31:12AM +0000, Lilijun (Jerry, Cloud Networking) wrote: > This problem is related with backend vhost-user socket abnormal cases, we shouldn't ask customers to configure it manually for backend's issues or depends on guest OS's network configuration. In Step 1 you said: > > > 1) In the VM, I add one route entry manually on the vNIC eth0 using the > > linux tool route. You configured the route manually inside the guest. Seems like a guest problem to me. If this was a physical machine that lost connectivity due to a link event, what would happen? Stefan --vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd Content-Type: application/pgp-signature; name="signature.asc" -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJchi5/AAoJEJykq7OBq3PILrIIAMC5rNU9zohL8QLbao8LxRow O7ltceN9XWoqcoYu+CH4ckdN37uXNkCDPSyaG7Mn6q0vucVUo2vpwu1SJM7lueeY qVHD0+9f4edUCTN5PED2/GfHJhOQOXs8gTH4GmNRy7UwLkWo160JFmIchQ+i4LnC Y5ewT2syIqahEL1kN9Y9jJSduMGD5scvTeFriugTUYumSE6qgMqmc3kr8+0BeOyu G/ooEz5Tb2i5kCvcX3pLMU46DSWKIVxrdXPnjHu5U1SAWzsO1fUsiSGU0aZpDVTz 4/gedRLRdLCHTsJUKLFD+JeR9cSR5JH07o6I/gfXuUZI2vw0zBiDmT70OXFvAx8= =XroA -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --vkogqOf2sHV7VnPd--