From: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
[ Upstream commit 81563d8548b0478075c720666be348d4199b8591 ]
When the police was removed from the port, then it was trying to
remove the police from the police id and not from the actual
police index.
The police id represents the id of the police and police index
represents the position in HW where the police is situated.
The port police id can be any number while the port police index
is a number based on the port chip port.
Fix this by deleting the police from HW that is situated at the
police index and not police id.
Fixes: 5390334b59a3 ("net: lan966x: Add port police support using tc-matchall")
Signed-off-by: Horatiu Vultur <horatiu.vultur@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Simon Horman <simon.horman@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@xxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: David S. Miller <davem@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>
Signed-off-by: Sasha Levin <sashal@xxxxxxxxxx>
---
drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_police.c | 2 +-
1 file changed, 1 insertion(+), 1 deletion(-)
diff --git a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_police.c b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_police.c
index a9aec900d608d..7d66fe75cd3bf 100644
--- a/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_police.c
+++ b/drivers/net/ethernet/microchip/lan966x/lan966x_police.c
@@ -194,7 +194,7 @@ int lan966x_police_port_del(struct lan966x_port *port,
return -EINVAL;
}
- err = lan966x_police_del(port, port->tc.police_id);
+ err = lan966x_police_del(port, POL_IDX_PORT + port->chip_port);
if (err) {
NL_SET_ERR_MSG_MOD(extack,
"Failed to add policer to port");
--
2.39.2
