From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Tassilo Horn Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Issues with Linux 3.0.1 and network-interface-list Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:20:07 +0200 Message-ID: <87wrea244o.fsf@tsdh.uni-koblenz.de> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: dough.gmane.org 1313677219 813 80.91.229.12 (18 Aug 2011 14:20:19 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@dough.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Thu, 18 Aug 2011 14:20:19 +0000 (UTC) To: emacs-devel@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Thu Aug 18 16:20:15 2011 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([140.186.70.17]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qu3SB-0006kl-Ji for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:20:15 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42389 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qu3SB-0003Pc-05 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 10:20:15 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([140.186.70.92]:52528) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qu3S8-0003PW-Vc for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 10:20:13 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qu3S8-0000qV-0X for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 10:20:12 -0400 Original-Received: from deliver.uni-koblenz.de ([141.26.64.15]:46553) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1Qu3S7-0000qN-SE for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 10:20:11 -0400 Original-Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by deliver.uni-koblenz.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0FEE21A40CE for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:20:11 +0200 (CEST) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at uni-koblenz.de Original-Received: from deliver.uni-koblenz.de ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (deliver.uni-koblenz.de [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id fbrJ2qAiP7pq for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:20:10 +0200 (CEST) X-CHKRCPT: Envelopesender noch tassilo@member.fsf.org Original-Received: from tsdh.uni-koblenz.de (tsdh.uni-koblenz.de [141.26.67.142]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by deliver.uni-koblenz.de (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 925981A40BD for ; Thu, 18 Aug 2011 16:20:10 +0200 (CEST) User-Agent: Gnus/5.110018 (No Gnus v0.18) Emacs/24.0.50 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6 (newer, 3) X-Received-From: 141.26.64.15 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:143406 Archived-At: Hi all, does someone else also have issues with `network-interface-list' with kernel version 3.0.1? For me, sometimes that function returns nil, although a second earlier and again a second later, it'll return a list of eth0 and lo... For example, with "strace -e ioctl emacs -Q" and then evaluating --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- (while t (let ((ifs (network-interface-list))) (if ifs (message "Ok") (error "ifs")))) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- in *scratch*, I first get some 100th Oks and then an error... The strace output is: --8<---------------cut here---------------start------------->8--- ioctl(15, SIOCGIFCONF, {80, {{"lo", {AF_INET, inet_addr("127.0.0.1")}}, {"eth0", {AF_INET, inet_addr("141.26.67.142")}}}}) = 0 ioctl(15, SIOCGIFCONF, {80, {{"lo", {AF_INET, inet_addr("127.0.0.1")}}, {"eth0", {AF_INET, inet_addr("141.26.67.142")}}}}) = 0 ioctl(15, SIOCGIFCONF, {80, {{"lo", {AF_INET, inet_addr("127.0.0.1")}}, {"eth0", {AF_INET, inet_addr("141.26.67.142")}}}}) = 0 [...] ioctl(15, SIOCGIFCONF, {0, {}}) --8<---------------cut here---------------end--------------->8--- It looks like a kernel bug, right? (If someone can reproduce that and has some C- and kernel-fu, it would be great if he could report that at the kernel bugtracker. I don't have any...) Bye, Tassilo