ipv6: remove one read_lock()/read_unlock() pair in rt6_check_neigh()

rt6_check_neigh() uses read_lock() to protect n->nud_state reading.

This seems overkill and causes false sharing.

Signed-off-by: Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>
Reviewed-by: David Ahern <dsahern@kernel.org>
Reviewed-by: Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>

diff --git a/net/ipv6/route.c b/net/ipv6/route.c
index 25c00c6f5131c55055f30348ef4605f50440ddbb..e829bd880384077027dc79fcae1a62eb0073f7c8 100644 (file)
--- a/net/ipv6/route.c
+++ b/net/ipv6/route.c
@@ -687,16 +687,16 @@ static enum rt6_nud_state rt6_check_neigh(const struct fib6_nh *fib6_nh)
        neigh = __ipv6_neigh_lookup_noref(fib6_nh->fib_nh_dev,
                                          &fib6_nh->fib_nh_gw6);
        if (neigh) {
-               read_lock(&neigh->lock);
-               if (neigh->nud_state & NUD_VALID)
+               u8 nud_state = READ_ONCE(neigh->nud_state);
+
+               if (nud_state & NUD_VALID)
                        ret = RT6_NUD_SUCCEED;
 #ifdef CONFIG_IPV6_ROUTER_PREF
-               else if (!(neigh->nud_state & NUD_FAILED))
+               else if (!(nud_state & NUD_FAILED))
                        ret = RT6_NUD_SUCCEED;
                else
                        ret = RT6_NUD_FAIL_PROBE;
 #endif
-               read_unlock(&neigh->lock);
        } else {
                ret = IS_ENABLED(CONFIG_IPV6_ROUTER_PREF) ?
                      RT6_NUD_SUCCEED : RT6_NUD_FAIL_DO_RR;