From: pengdonglin <redacted>

Since commit a8bb74acd8efe ("rcu: Consolidate RCU-sched update-side function definitions")
there is no difference between rcu_read_lock(), rcu_read_lock_bh() and
rcu_read_lock_sched() in terms of RCU read section and the relevant grace
period. That means that spin_lock(), which implies rcu_read_lock_sched(),
also implies rcu_read_lock().

There is no need no explicitly start a RCU read section if one has already
been started implicitly by spin_lock().

Simplify the code and remove the inner rcu_read_lock() invocation.

Cc: Jay Vosburgh <jv@jvosburgh.net>
Cc: Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>
Cc: Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>
Signed-off-by: pengdonglin <redacted>
Signed-off-by: pengdonglin <redacted>
---
 drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c | 2 --
 1 file changed, 2 deletions(-)

diff --git a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
index 4edc8e6b6b64..c53ea73f103a 100644
--- a/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c
+++ b/drivers/net/bonding/bond_3ad.c

@@ -2485,7 +2485,6 @@ void bond_3ad_state_machine_handler(struct work_struct *work)
 	 * concurrently due to incoming LACPDU as well.
 	 */
 	spin_lock_bh(&bond->mode_lock);
-	rcu_read_lock();
 
 	/* check if there are any slaves */
 	if (!bond_has_slaves(bond))

@@ -2537,7 +2536,6 @@ void bond_3ad_state_machine_handler(struct work_struct *work)
 			break;
 		}
 	}
-	rcu_read_unlock();
 	spin_unlock_bh(&bond->mode_lock);
 
 	if (update_slave_arr)

-- 
2.34.1