Messages in this thread | | | Date | Wed, 1 Mar 2023 14:27:11 +0200 | From | Vladimir Oltean <> | Subject | Re: [PATCH net] net: lan966x: Fix port police support using tc-matchall |
| |
On Tue, Feb 28, 2023 at 09:47:42PM +0100, Horatiu Vultur wrote: > 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@microchip.com> > --- > 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"); > -- > 2.38.0 >
Reviewed-by: Vladimir Oltean <vladimir.oltean@nxp.com>
but the extack message is also wrong; it says it failed to add the policer, when the operation that failed was a deletion.
| |