[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Message-ID: <ZwBhNqXbn5R1JN1Y@google.com>
Date: Fri, 4 Oct 2024 14:42:14 -0700
From: Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org>
To: Song Liu <song@...nel.org>
Cc: Alexei Starovoitov <ast@...nel.org>,
Daniel Borkmann <daniel@...earbox.net>,
Andrii Nakryiko <andrii@...nel.org>,
Martin KaFai Lau <martin.lau@...ux.dev>,
Eduard Zingerman <eddyz87@...il.com>,
Yonghong Song <yonghong.song@...ux.dev>,
John Fastabend <john.fastabend@...il.com>,
KP Singh <kpsingh@...nel.org>, Stanislav Fomichev <sdf@...ichev.me>,
Hao Luo <haoluo@...gle.com>, Jiri Olsa <jolsa@...nel.org>,
LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>, bpf@...r.kernel.org,
Andrew Morton <akpm@...ux-foundation.org>,
Christoph Lameter <cl@...ux.com>, Pekka Enberg <penberg@...nel.org>,
David Rientjes <rientjes@...gle.com>,
Joonsoo Kim <iamjoonsoo.kim@....com>,
Vlastimil Babka <vbabka@...e.cz>,
Roman Gushchin <roman.gushchin@...ux.dev>,
Hyeonggon Yoo <42.hyeyoo@...il.com>, linux-mm@...ck.org,
Arnaldo Carvalho de Melo <acme@...nel.org>,
Kees Cook <kees@...nel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v4 bpf-next 1/3] bpf: Add kmem_cache iterator
On Fri, Oct 04, 2024 at 01:45:09PM -0700, Song Liu wrote:
> On Wed, Oct 2, 2024 at 11:09 AM Namhyung Kim <namhyung@...nel.org> wrote:
> >
> [...]
> > +
> > +static void *kmem_cache_iter_seq_start(struct seq_file *seq, loff_t *pos)
> > +{
> > + loff_t cnt = 0;
> > + bool found = false;
> > + struct kmem_cache *s;
> > +
> > + mutex_lock(&slab_mutex);
> > +
> > + /*
> > + * Find an entry at the given position in the slab_caches list instead
> > + * of keeping a reference (of the last visited entry, if any) out of
> > + * slab_mutex. It might miss something if one is deleted in the middle
> > + * while it releases the lock. But it should be rare and there's not
> > + * much we can do about it.
> > + */
> > + list_for_each_entry(s, &slab_caches, list) {
> > + if (cnt == *pos) {
> > + /*
> > + * Make sure this entry remains in the list by getting
> > + * a new reference count. Note that boot_cache entries
> > + * have a negative refcount, so don't touch them.
> > + */
> > + if (s->refcount > 0)
> > + s->refcount++;
> > + found = true;
> > + break;
> > + }
> > + cnt++;
> > + }
> > + mutex_unlock(&slab_mutex);
> > +
> > + if (!found)
> > + return NULL;
> > +
> > + ++*pos;
>
> This should be
>
> if (*pos == 0)
> ++*pos;
Oh, I thought there's check for seq->count after the seq->op->show()
for the ->start(). I need to check this logic again, thanks for
pointing this out.
Thanks,
Namhyung
>
> > + return s;
> > +}
> > +
> > +static void kmem_cache_iter_seq_stop(struct seq_file *seq, void *v)
> [...]
Powered by blists - more mailing lists