iputils-20160308-8.el7.x86_64 also has the same miss behavior .


+++ This bug was initially created as a clone of Bug #1225122 +++

Description of problem:
arping with '-c' option tries to ping forever when a parallel operation  deletes the -I <device>.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):
iputils-20140519-4.fc21.x86_64

How reproducible:
always

Steps to Reproduce:
$ ip tuntap add mode tap dev test; ifconfig test 10.4.4.1/24; ip link set up dev test; (sleep 1; ip link delete test) & arping -U -I test -c 13 10.4.4.1
[1] 7258
ARPING 10.4.4.1 from 10.4.4.1 test
arping: recvfrom: Network is down

# It does not returns the prompt, blocked in arping.

Actual results:
arping never exit, this causes neutron-lbaas service does not operates properly.

Expected results:
The arping with -c option (without -w) MUST exit after the number (-c) of tries.

The failed attempts should not be counted as sent ARP at the end.

The el7 version of arping behaves as it expected (iputils-20121221-6.el7.x86_64).
#  ip tuntap add mode tap dev test; ifconfig test 10.4.4.1/24; ip link set up dev test; (sleep 1; ip link delete test) & arping -U -I test -c 13 10.4.4.1
[1] 18570
ARPING 10.4.4.1 from 10.4.4.1 test
arping: recvfrom: Network is down
Sent 2 probes (2 broadcast(s))
Received 0 response(s)
[1]+  Done                    ( sleep 1; ip link delete test )

# # I got back the prompt after ~ 13 arping time, but actually it did only 2 successful sent attempt, before the link got deleted.

 
Additional info:
According to strace arping does the following in an infinite loop. 

recvfrom(3, 0x7ffdeafe47b0, 4096, 0, 0x7ffdeafe4730, 0x7ffdeafe4620) = ? ERESTARTSYS (To be restarted if SA_RESTART is set)
--- SIGALRM {si_signo=SIGALRM, si_code=SI_KERNEL} ---
clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, {21930, 694909708}) = 0
clock_gettime(CLOCK_MONOTONIC, {21930, 694939330}) = 0
sendto(3, "\0\1\10\0\6\4\0\1\316.Dd*\273\n\4\4\1\377\377\377\377\377\377\n\4\4\1", 28, 0, {sa_family=AF_PACKET, proto=0x806, if14, pkttype=PACKET_HOST, addr(6)={1, ffffffffffff}, 20) = -1 ENXIO (No such device or address)
alarm(1)                                = 0
rt_sigreturn({mask=[]})                 = 45
recvfrom(3, 0x7ffdeafe47b0, 4096, 0, 0x7ffdeafe4730, 0x7ffdeafe4620) = ? ERESTARTSYS (To be restarted if SA_RESTART is set)

--- Additional comment from Attila Fazekas on 2015-06-03 09:59:58 EDT ---

The issue also happens with f22 iputils-20140519-4.fc22.x86_64.

iputils-20121221-4.fc20.x86_64 is OK.

--- Additional comment from Fedora End Of Life on 2015-11-04 06:35:59 EST ---

This message is a reminder that Fedora 21 is nearing its end of life.
Approximately 4 (four) weeks from now Fedora will stop maintaining
and issuing updates for Fedora 21. It is Fedora's policy to close all
bug reports from releases that are no longer maintained. At that time
this bug will be closed as EOL if it remains open with a Fedora  'version'
of '21'.

Package Maintainer: If you wish for this bug to remain open because you
plan to fix it in a currently maintained version, simply change the 'version' 
to a later Fedora version.

Thank you for reporting this issue and we are sorry that we were not 
able to fix it before Fedora 21 is end of life. If you would still like 
to see this bug fixed and are able to reproduce it against a later version 
of Fedora, you are encouraged  change the 'version' to a later Fedora 
version prior this bug is closed as described in the policy above.

Although we aim to fix as many bugs as possible during every release's 
lifetime, sometimes those efforts are overtaken by events. Often a 
more recent Fedora release includes newer upstream software that fixes 
bugs or makes them obsolete.

--- Additional comment from Fedora End Of Life on 2015-12-02 08:00:19 EST ---

Fedora 21 changed to end-of-life (EOL) status on 2015-12-01. Fedora 21 is
no longer maintained, which means that it will not receive any further
security or bug fix updates. As a result we are closing this bug.

If you can reproduce this bug against a currently maintained version of
Fedora please feel free to reopen this bug against that version. If you
are unable to reopen this bug, please file a new report against the
current release. If you experience problems, please add a comment to this
bug.

Thank you for reporting this bug and we are sorry it could not be fixed.

--- Additional comment from Attila Fazekas on 2016-10-21 04:25:55 EDT ---

I have the same issue with iputils-20160308-3.fc24.x86_64 .