XPost: linux.kernel, linux.debian.bugs.dist   
   From: benh@debian.org   
      
   Hi all,   
      
   On Fri, 2025-12-19 at 10:19 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:   
   > On 12/18/25 20:50, Salvatore Bonaccorso wrote:   
   > >    
   > > Is there soemthing missing?   
   > >    
   > > Roland I think it would be helpful if you can test as well more recent   
   > > stable series versions to confirm if the issue is present there as   
   > > well or not, which might indicate a 5.10.y specific backporting   
   > > problem.   
   >    
   > FWIW, it (as usual) would be very important to know if this happens with   
   > mainline as well, as that determines if it's a general problem or a   
   > backporting problem   
   [...]   
      
   The bug is this:   
      
   - libvirtd wrongly used to use NLM_F_CREATE (0x400) and NLM_F_EXCL   
     (0x200) flags on an RTM_DELLINK operation.  These flags are only   
     semantically valid for NEW-type operations.   
      
   - rtnetlink is rather lax about checking the flags on operations, so   
     these unsupported flags had no effect.   
      
   - rtnetlink can now support NLM_F_BULK (0x200) on some DEL-type   
     operations.  If the flag is used but is not valid for the specific   
     operation then the operation now fails with EOPNOTSUPP.  Since   
     NLM_F_EXCL == NLM_F_BULK and RTM_DELLINK does not support bulk   
     operations, libvirtd now hits this error case.   
      
   I have not tested with mainline, but in principle the same issue should   
   occur with any other kernel version that has commit a6cec0bcd342 "net:   
   rtnetlink: add bulk delete support flag" together with an older version   
   of libvirt.   
      
   This was fixed in libvirt commit 1334002340b, which appears to have gone   
   into version 7.1.0, but Debian 11 "bullseye" has 7.0.0.   
      
   We can certainly fix the libvirt side of this in Debian, but this also   
   sounds like a case where the kernel should work around known buggy user-   
   space.  On the other hand, this has been upstream for over 3 years so   
   maybe it doesn't make sense now.   
      
   Please let me know whether I (or anyone) should try to implement a   
   workaround for this in the kernel.   
      
   Ben.   
      
   --    
   Ben Hutchings - Debian developer, member of kernel, installer and LTS   
   teams   
      
   -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----   
      
   iQIzBAABCgAdFiEErCspvTSmr92z9o8157/I7JWGEQkFAmlYKBIACgkQ57/I7JWG   
   EQnD0A//T7s2mc8lgDzrecnjiCAaxAAnYMYUy/UhgiuFea9wFuXqo76ucc0paWs7   
   YmvABwnDSiyl9lq4WfN5CGTmai+arF4PMLQLlmRXslato+22hVK/731P62DfzW+6   
   Mx5pPyDGaVAkFQHe/hOku64F9/NHbC3ZptPXVoxLeQDTTkTPP+y7G7mxZJUp/KOu   
   YsnMQdDvnqiZsjSyEddi+HDast2K7bxm+iDZ8qJm8crzYux4kXeRo1b+Pug72f1k   
   XErFYPSw8DtQw1OOdxRtP2id4dMhLaXzkde8VFky6jowAFLk3dwV0YwsYm9OAkEQ   
   8pdQ+7C/JTKznJFeJQjVz5P9TDevqDK+v4PkGPia+KSQN1rcxVRHX9h7Ci5ongk3   
   l3gTy4U8nz4Mw+ap0qWAmgidfkqcL2Kp/GY0ck8uPXUjtPYWE288KOtMK/z+R8vk   
   B7KcU4YmIvqxEAVMPARatHO4ElUhdzNhj0+vRlr00zHumWZb+Cu6Sk5QC9aTCUVJ   
   gNi/tveeZwcbKWpnyaUr7CdLwgLVXhi7k6KDw+UCMWYrOqMiLsjgFa9QMHqK9bKG   
   FETqDyYvkGnU0Yb4itsE5hTkh9pqNTp3nkIxn0YI7RUF8kYEstV4DW3jjMVjIMad   
   PLiW1gtAOxADHaHuFlqcpbCI1SRsS56ID5r0dgZPjaNoUmbJVR0=   
   =AH7O   
   -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)