[systemd-devel] when/where was support for assigning "ethX" names removed?

[Lennart Poettering]

On Thu, 26.05.16 12:28, Chris Friesen (cbf123 at mail.usask.ca) wrote:

> So I've been playing with this a bit, but I've run into another snag.  It
> seems that on initial boot even with "net.ifnames=0" the ethernet interface
> ordering isn't consistent.
> 
> This means that two systems with identical hardware can end up mapping
> "eth1000" to different physical slots.  This makes it very difficult to set
> up multiple machines.

Yupp, thta's what we have been saying all along: enumerating and
probing devices is not stable, that's why the predictable interface
names have been introduced after all, so that the same name refers to
the same device all the time.

> I assume this is due to parallel network device initialization from
> udev?

Well, udev just modprobes the driver. The driver then probes all
devices and that happens in any order it likes.

> Is there a way to serialize this at the cost of slower system
> initialization?  I don't really care what the ordering is, as long as it is
> consistent on identical hardware.
> 
> (Yes, I realize that the ideal would be to use the newer position-based
> naming, but that would mean a whole lot more work at this point.)

Well, the old scheme is borked, that's why we fixed it. You don't like
the fix, but want it fixed anyway. Not sure what else we can suggest...

Lennart

-- 
Lennart Poettering, Red Hat