Bug 907694

Summary:	wickedd boot error "netlink reports error -17" on 'lo' interface IPv6 setup
Product:	[openSUSE] openSUSE Distribution	Reporter:	Forgotten User dBpEIsMMD7 <forgotten_dBpEIsMMD7>
Component:	Network	Assignee:	wicked maintainers <wicked-maintainers>
Status:	RESOLVED FIXED	QA Contact:	E-mail List <qa-bugs>
Severity:	Normal
Priority:	P5 - None	CC:	kmroz, mt
Version:	13.2
Target Milestone:	---
Hardware:	x86-64
OS:	openSUSE 13.2
Whiteboard:
Found By:	---	Services Priority:
Business Priority:		Blocker:	---
Marketing QA Status:	---	IT Deployment:	---

Description Forgotten User dBpEIsMMD7 2014-11-29 18:36:27 UTC

after 13.2 boot,

	journalctl -b
		...
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: lo: applying system config for ipv4:static lease in state applying: success [0]
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wicked[1081]: lo: calling org.opensuse.Network.Addrconf.ipv6.static.requestLease()
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wicked[1081]: ni_dbus_object_call_variant(/org/opensuse/Network/Interface/1, if=org.opensuse.Network.Addrconf.ipv6.static, method=requestLease)
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: __ni_dbus_object_message(path=/org/opensuse/Network/Interface/1, interface=org.opensuse.Network.Addrconf.ipv6.static, method=requestLease) called
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: lo: received ipv6:static lease update in state granted
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: lo: adjusting mtu for ipv6:static lease in state applying: success [0]
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: lo: address ::1 covered by a static lease
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: Adding new interface address ::1/128
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: __ni_rtnl_send_newaddr(::1/128)
!!		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: netlink reports error -17
!!		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: __ni_nl_talk: recv failed: Object exists
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: lo: applying addresses for ipv6:static lease in state applying: success [0]
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: lo: verifying adressses for ipv6:static lease in state applying: success [0]
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: lo: applying routes for ipv6:static lease in state applying: success [0]
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: ni_system_update_from_lease()
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: Updating system generic settings from static/ipv6 lease
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: handle_other_event(generic-updated)
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: sending event "genericUpdated"
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wickedd[1072]: lo: applying system config for ipv6:static lease in state applying: success [0]
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wicked[1081]: lo: changed state lldp-up -> network-up
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wicked[1081]: lo: cancel timeout
		Nov 29 09:40:55 svr022 wicked[1081]: lo: successfully transitioned from lldp-up to network-up
		...

with

	ifconfig lo
		lo        Link encap:Local Loopback  
		          inet addr:127.0.0.1  Mask:255.0.0.0
		          inet6 addr: ::1/128 Scope:Host
		          UP LOOPBACK RUNNING  MTU:65536  Metric:1
		          RX packets:79 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 frame:0
		          TX packets:79 errors:0 dropped:0 overruns:0 carrier:0
		          collisions:0 txqueuelen:0 
		          RX bytes:7909 (7.7 Kb)  TX bytes:7909 (7.7 Kb)

Comment 1 Karol Mroz 2014-12-01 05:29:32 UTC

Thanks for the report!

This strikes me as a case where we're adding the same address to an interface twice. You'll get a similar reply from `ip addr add 127.0.0.1/8 dev lo` -> "File exists" instead of our "Object exists" (the difference I think we can sum up to the reporting mechanism used).

I read through the kernel a bit, and from what I see, the loopback interface by default get's ::1/127.0.0.1 addresses assigned. The driver sets type/flags to ARPHRD_LOOPBACK and IFF_LOOPBACK respectively, and these are later used to identify and set the default addresses. I've not traced through the kernel to confirm this, but it's a suspicion. This process may collide with Wicked's attempt to initialize lo and we get some complaints from netlink.

Have you noticed any system impact?

Thanks,
Karol

Comment 2 Forgotten User dBpEIsMMD7 2014-12-01 05:34:35 UTC

> Have you noticed any system impact?

atm (search bugs on my name ...) I see lots of problems with wicked* on os 13.2.

i can't say, yet, what specifically is impacting what.

is there any OBVIOUS system impact?  not that I'm yet aware ... that's the best I can do.

Comment 4 Bernhard Wiedemann 2015-04-25 01:00:22 UTC

This is an autogenerated message for OBS integration:
This bug (907694) was mentioned in
https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/303888 Factory / wicked
https://build.opensuse.org/request/show/303889 13.2 / wicked

Comment 5 Marius Tomaschewski 2015-04-27 11:23:52 UTC

(In reply to grant k from comment #2)
> is there any OBVIOUS system impact?

No, it are just errors reported by netlink code -- they do not cause any harm.
They should not appear in 0.6.18 any more.

Comment 6 Swamp Workflow Management 2015-05-06 11:05:15 UTC

openSUSE-RU-2015:0820-1: An update that has 8 recommended fixes can now be installed.

Category: recommended (moderate)
Bug References: 907215,907694,918662,920070,920889,921218,927065,927616
CVE References: 
Sources used:
openSUSE 13.2 (src):    wicked-0.6.18-15.1

Comment 7 Swamp Workflow Management 2015-05-21 17:05:38 UTC

SUSE-RU-2015:0924-1: An update that has 14 recommended fixes can now be installed.

Category: recommended (moderate)
Bug References: 904323,905421,907215,907694,909307,911299,911562,914792,918662,920070,920889,921218,927065,927616
CVE References: 
Sources used:
SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 12 (src):    wicked-0.6.18-16.1
SUSE Linux Enterprise Desktop 12 (src):    wicked-0.6.18-16.1