Comment 1 for bug 1929657

Reading through the info provided I found it surprising that the IP address could not be attached to only one of the vlan devices (enP53p0s0.171@enP53p0s0).

Can you share how the devices were activated and how they are based upon? (OSA/qeth, hipersockets/qeth or RoCE/SMC)

I assume that all interfaces that start with "enP*" are based on RoCE/SMC devices, right?

If this is the case I find the naming very strange:
This name seems to be fine: enP53p0s0
But this looks odd to me: enP50s3832 - especially the ending: 3832

On my test system (that unfortunately only has older X-3 Pro based RoCE adapters) the naming is like this (and with that pretty structured and straight-forward):
   enP1p0s0
   enP1p0s0d1
   enP2p0s0
   enP2p0s0d1
So is enP50s3832 really a RoCE interface?

And are there any udev rules that were written or modified to modify the name of this adapter? Or is it otherwise traceable where this name is coming from (even knowing that this is the interface that got the ip address assigned).

Could you also please share the output of 'sudo lshw'?