Proxmox 4.0 - Previously running LXC container won't start

J

JAZ013

New Member
May 8, 2012
11
0
1
Canberra, ACT, Australia
www.funkynerd.com
Got a bit of a problem with my shiny new LXC containers. When the system boots, everything starts up fine and is running very well.

However, when I shutdown a container from the web interface regardless of whether I make a change or not, I'm unable to restart the container.

Task output shows:

Code: 
lxc-start: lxc_start.c: main: 344 The container failed to start.
lxc-start: lxc_start.c: main: 346 To get more details, run the container in foreground mode.
lxc-start: lxc_start.c: main: 348 Additional information can be obtained by setting the --logfile and --logpriority options.
TASK OK

Sorry, but task is decidedly NOT OK.

When trying to start the container in the foreground from an ssh session, I get this output:

Code: 
root@destiny:~# lxc-start --name 101 --foreground
RTNETLINK answers: No buffer space available
Dump terminated
Use of uninitialized value $tag in concatenation (.) or string at /usr/share/perl5/PVE/Network.pm line 176.
unable to add vlan  to interface veth101i0
lxc-start: conf.c: run_buffer: 342 Script exited with status 25
lxc-start: conf.c: lxc_create_network: 3047 failed to create netdev
lxc-start: start.c: lxc_spawn: 954 failed to create the network
lxc-start: start.c: __lxc_start: 1211 failed to spawn '101'
lxc-start: lxc_start.c: main: 344 The container failed to start.
lxc-start: lxc_start.c: main: 348 Additional information can be obtained by setting the --logfile and --logpriority options.

If I reboot the host, everything starts working fine again. Also, there is nothing special about the containers. They are just Debian containers with some storage and a single network interface with an IPv4 address and no VLANs or anything like that.

Thoughts, anyone? Any help would be appreciated.
 
This has become a bit more of an issue now. I'm now unable to start any new containers. Previously, I thought it was fixed in an update but turns out that rebooting just made it work for a bit longer than usual.

Now though, I can't start any containers that weren't started on boot.

Out put of pveversion -v

Code: 
root@destiny:~# pveversion -v
proxmox-ve: 4.1-39 (running kernel: 4.2.8-1-pve)
pve-manager: 4.1-15 (running version: 4.1-15/8cd55b52)
pve-kernel-4.2.6-1-pve: 4.2.6-36
pve-kernel-4.2.8-1-pve: 4.2.8-39
pve-kernel-4.2.2-1-pve: 4.2.2-16
pve-kernel-4.2.3-2-pve: 4.2.3-22
lvm2: 2.02.116-pve2
corosync-pve: 2.3.5-2
libqb0: 1.0-1
pve-cluster: 4.0-33
qemu-server: 4.0-62
pve-firmware: 1.1-7
libpve-common-perl: 4.0-49
libpve-access-control: 4.0-11
libpve-storage-perl: 4.0-42
pve-libspice-server1: 0.12.5-2
vncterm: 1.2-1
pve-qemu-kvm: 2.5-8
pve-container: 1.0-46
pve-firewall: 2.0-18
pve-ha-manager: 1.0-23
ksm-control-daemon: 1.2-1
glusterfs-client: 3.5.2-2+deb8u1
lxc-pve: 1.1.5-7
lxcfs: 2.0.0-pve1
cgmanager: 0.39-pve1
criu: 1.6.0-1
zfsutils: 0.6.5-pve7~jessie
 
Oh, further to this, I tried starting from the command line again and get the same output. So I removed the network device from via the web interface and the container started up fine. It's a bit useless to me without an ethernet interface but definitely points to a networking issue.
 
Output is:

Code: 
RTNETLINK answers: No buffer space available
Dump terminated
unable to add default vlan tags to interface veth400i0
lxc-start: conf.c: run_buffer: 342 Script exited with status 25
lxc-start: conf.c: lxc_create_network: 3084 failed to create netdev
lxc-start: start.c: lxc_spawn: 954 failed to create the network
lxc-start: start.c: __lxc_start: 1211 failed to spawn '400'
lxc-start: lxc_start.c: main: 344 The container failed to start.
lxc-start: lxc_start.c: main: 348 Additional information can be obtained by setting the --logfile and --logpriority options.
 
Does `pct config 101` show anything unusual? Can you post the output?
EDIT: Okay the second error is less confusing but still weird... Is your iproute2 package up to date?
 
Last edited:
Here's two:

Code: 
root@destiny:~# pct config 101
arch: amd64
cpulimit: 2
cpuunits: 1024
description: Ansible Configuration Management%0A
hostname: young
memory: 1024
net0: name=eth0,hwaddr=5E:91:7C:9D:C7:F7,bridge=vmbr0,ip=10.13.1.1/24,gw=10.13.1.254
onboot: 1
ostype: debian
rootfs: LocalContainers:subvol-101-disk-1,size=20G
startup: order=99
swap: 2048

root@destiny:~# pct config 400
arch: amd64
cpulimit: 1
cpuunits: 1024
hostname: test
memory: 512
net0: bridge=vmbr0,hwaddr=66:38:66:64:36:62,ip=dhcp,name=eth0,type=veth
ostype: debian
rootfs: LocalContainers:subvol-400-disk-1,size=8G
swap: 512

All packages are up to date.

I only just realised that it may have something to do with it, but I'm using a bonded Ethernet interface. I have a dual port Intel gigabit Ethernet adapter that has both ports bonded using LACP. I might try and turn off bonding and see if the problem still exists to rule that out.
 
Hi,

Any solution to this problem yet ? I´ve just ran into it as well, but I´m not running containers, only regular VM:s.
Tried with several powered off VMs, and none of them can start unless I remove the nic.
 
Just thought I would add this. After upgrading to Proxmox 4.2 yesterday I don't appear to be having this problem anymore. I'm pretty sure it was being caused by the bonded Ethernet interface. Proxmox 4.2 brought with it kernel 4.4.8-1-pve which appears to have fixed things.

I won't be 100% sure for a little while but we shall call it 95% certain for now.

To stress test I actually added 6 network interfaces to a container, all with DHCP. Normally that would have been a guaranteed fail but the container started perfectly fine. I've also done all my other tests that usually killed the container like starting/stopping repeatedly, sucking in lots of network datas, etc. Nothing seems to be able to kill it anymore.

The real test will be leaving it up and running for a few days/weeks as that is usually when the problem really starts to persist. But for now.... great success!?
 
Hi I have this issue now for all of my cluster. I have version 4.1. Is any solution for this?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back