Commit ac8148d9 authored by Oleg Nesterov's avatar Oleg Nesterov Committed by Alexei Starovoitov

bpf: bpf_iter_task_next: use next_task(kit->task) rather than next_task(kit->pos)

This looks more clear and simplifies the code. While at it, remove the
unnecessary initialization of pos/task at the start of bpf_iter_task_new().

Note that we can even kill kit->task, we can just use pos->group_leader,
but I don't understand the BUILD_BUG_ON() checks in bpf_iter_task_new().
Signed-off-by: default avatarOleg Nesterov <oleg@redhat.com>
Acked-by: default avatarYonghong Song <yonghong.song@linux.dev>
Link: https://lore.kernel.org/r/20231114163239.GA903@redhat.comSigned-off-by: default avatarAlexei Starovoitov <ast@kernel.org>
parent 5a34f9da
......@@ -978,7 +978,6 @@ __bpf_kfunc int bpf_iter_task_new(struct bpf_iter_task *it,
BUILD_BUG_ON(__alignof__(struct bpf_iter_task_kern) !=
__alignof__(struct bpf_iter_task));
kit->task = kit->pos = NULL;
switch (flags) {
case BPF_TASK_ITER_ALL_THREADS:
case BPF_TASK_ITER_ALL_PROCS:
......@@ -1016,18 +1015,15 @@ __bpf_kfunc struct task_struct *bpf_iter_task_next(struct bpf_iter_task *it)
goto get_next_task;
kit->pos = __next_thread(kit->pos);
if (!kit->pos) {
if (flags == BPF_TASK_ITER_PROC_THREADS)
return pos;
kit->pos = kit->task;
} else
if (kit->pos || flags == BPF_TASK_ITER_PROC_THREADS)
return pos;
get_next_task:
kit->pos = next_task(kit->pos);
kit->task = kit->pos;
if (kit->pos == &init_task)
kit->task = next_task(kit->task);
if (kit->task == &init_task)
kit->pos = NULL;
else
kit->pos = kit->task;
return pos;
}
......
Markdown is supported
0%
or
You are about to add 0 people to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Please register or to comment