On 26.11.2015 09:15, Cédric Bosdonnat wrote: > As per http://www.redhat.com/archives/libvir-list/2013-July/msg01279.html, > wait for udev events to be handled after removing a virtual NIC. > Any udev rule associated to NIC destroy could happen to run with a new > device with the same name that is being created. > --- > src/util/virnetdevveth.c | 3 +++ > 1 file changed, 3 insertions(+) > > diff --git a/src/util/virnetdevveth.c b/src/util/virnetdevveth.c > index 6905168..c8a38fb 100644 > --- a/src/util/virnetdevveth.c > +++ b/src/util/virnetdevveth.c > @@ -225,5 +225,8 @@ int virNetDevVethDelete(const char *veth) > ret = 0; > cleanup: > virCommandFree(cmd); > + /* Make sure the device is properly down: creating a new one > + * with the same name could lead to troubles */ > + virFileWaitForDevices(); > return ret; > } > I'm not fully convinced this is right approach. I mean, we do create plenty of devices here and there and tear them down. How come this is the only place causing trouble? Then, this function you are patching is called in a loop in couple of places. Wouldn't it be better to wait for udev after the loop and not in it?