Bug 159108 - error message comes up after ethernet bonding
error message comes up after ethernet bonding
Product: Red Hat Enterprise Linux 4
Classification: Red Hat
Component: kernel (Show other bugs)
x86_64 Linux
medium Severity medium
: ---
: ---
Assigned To: John W. Linville
Brian Brock
Depends On:
  Show dependency treegraph
Reported: 2005-05-29 19:10 EDT by EE CAP Admin
Modified: 2007-11-30 17:07 EST (History)
1 user (show)

See Also:
Fixed In Version:
Doc Type: Bug Fix
Doc Text:
Story Points: ---
Clone Of:
Last Closed: 2005-06-06 12:57:02 EDT
Type: ---
Regression: ---
Mount Type: ---
Documentation: ---
Verified Versions:
Category: ---
oVirt Team: ---
RHEL 7.3 requirements from Atomic Host:
Cloudforms Team: ---

Attachments (Terms of Use)
Output of sysreport (669.25 KB, application/x-bzip2)
2005-06-06 09:38 EDT, EE CAP Admin
no flags Details

  None (edit)
Description EE CAP Admin 2005-05-29 19:10:04 EDT
From Bugzilla Helper:
User-Agent: Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows NT 5.1; .NET CLR 1.1.4322)

Description of problem:
We have two ethernet cards on our HP proliant 360 server, and we have already set up the ethernet bonding. The OS running on the server is RHEL4. The warning message when restarting the network is as following,

‘kernel: bonding: Warning: the permanent HWaddr of eth0 - 00:12:79:94:66:1A - is still in use by bond0. Set the HWaddr of eth0 to a different address to avoid conflicts’.

Version-Release number of selected component (if applicable):

How reproducible:

Steps to Reproduce:
1. Set up the ethernet bonding

Actual Results:  Error message comes up.

Expected Results:  No error message.

Additional info:

For detail information of ethernet bonding we follow, please go to

Comment 1 John W. Linville 2005-06-06 09:18:03 EDT
Please attach the output of running "sysreport". 
When the network restarts, does the bond function correctly?  Are all expected 
interfaces still part of the bond? 
When the bonding interface comes-up, it "steals" a MAC address from one of its 
slaves (generally the first one).  The message you are seeing occurs when the 
interface that had it's MAC address stolen is removed from the bond while the 
bond remains active. 
My guess is that this is just an artifact of the restart process removing 
interfaces from the bond prior to bringing the bond down before restarting.  
If the bond continues to work properly after the network restart, then the 
message can be safely ignored. 
Comment 2 EE CAP Admin 2005-06-06 09:38:43 EDT
Created attachment 115165 [details]
Output of sysreport
Comment 3 EE CAP Admin 2005-06-06 09:41:42 EDT
Hi John,

Thanks for getting back about this.

OK - as you have seen - sysreport uploaded.

Yes - the bonding does seem to always work; we were just concerned that we were
getting errors and didn't want it to bite us in the backside later on.  

So is something starting/stoppin in the wrong order?  Does something need
modifying in /etc/init.d/network?


Comment 4 John W. Linville 2005-06-06 12:57:02 EDT
Considering the situation, I don't really think it would be right to call it  
the "wrong" order.  It would be difficult to keep track of the perfect order  
for bringing the slave interfaces up and down, all just to avoid a warning  
message that ultimately doesn't effect the situation.  
I'm going to close this as NOTABUG, since it is at worst really just an 
annoying message.  Feel free to reopen this if you observe actual loss of 
functionality.  Thanks! 
Comment 5 EE CAP Admin 2005-06-06 13:13:18 EDT
Hi John - thanks for the info on this.

I'm not going to reopen... I just wanted confirmation that things were operating
properly and that we hadn't set something up wrong.


Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.