[systemd-devel] Misleading udev error messages regarding virtual interfaces

[Tom Gundersen]

On Wed, Jul 2, 2014 at 5:23 PM, Leonid Isaev <lisaev at umail.iu.edu> wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 02, 2014 at 03:15:58PM +0200, Lennart Poettering wrote:
>> On Sun, 29.06.14 17:50, Leonid Isaev (lisaev at umail.iu.edu) wrote:
>>
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> >     I am seeing the following messages in my syslog on each boot:
>> > ------
>> > $ grep "link config " /var/log/errors.log
>> > 2014-06-29T09:31:39.000-04:00 hermes systemd-udevd[246]: Could not apply link config to br0
>> > 2014-06-29T09:31:40.000-04:00 hermes systemd-udevd[246]: Could not apply link config to veth0VRCA6
>> > ------
>> >
>> > The bridge 'br0' is used for LXC containers and set up via networkd:
>> > ------
>> > $ cat /etc/systemd/network/lxc_bridge.netdev
>> > [NetDev]
>> > Name=br0
>> > Kind=bridge
>> >
>> > $ cat /etc/systemd/network/lxc_bridge.network
>> > [Match]
>> > Name=br0
>> >
>> > [Network]
>> > Description=LAN bridge for LXC containers
>> > DHCP=false
>> >
>> > [Address]
>> > Address=10.137.0.1/24
>> > ------
>> >
>> > The interface 'vethXXXXXX' is a container part (I guess) of the veth pair.
>> >
>> > What is the meaning of the above errors, why are they printed, and is there a
>> > way to get rid of them?
>>
>> I have improved the error message in git to print the actual error that
>> is happening. This should make it easier to figure out what is going
>> wrong.
>
> Thanks!
>
>>
>> Most likely you have some .link file lying around that matches the
>> bridge or veth device you are creating, which causes this error.
>
> No, the only .link file in my system is the vanilla
> /usr/lib/systemd/network/99-default.link. Does it match all possible
> interfaces now?
>
> The bridge is set up only via the above .netdev/.network files. The vethXXXXXX
> interface (with random XXXXXX) is created dynamically by the lxc tools...

Hm, I'm now able to reproduce this. Not figured it out yet though. It
happens for devices that should not have had any change applied at
all. The error we get is ENOENT.

-t