Message ID | qwinzohs4pwawth5i6g7hfb2376pyfmkurbo2rwvglv77asbkr@mq2goetrtmpu (mailing list archive) |
---|---|
State | RFC |
Headers | show |
Series | bpf_task_storage improvement question | expand |
Context | Check | Description |
---|---|---|
netdev/tree_selection | success | Guessing tree name failed - patch did not apply |
On 12/2/24 4:38 AM, Christian Brauner wrote: > Hey, > > I just had to take a quick look at kernel/bpf/bpf_task_storage.c and > realized that you're doing: > > > fd = *(int *)key; > pid = pidfd_get_pid(fd, &f_flags); > > // something something > > task = pid_task(pid, PIDTYPE_PID); > > bpf_task_storage_lock(); > // something something > bpf_task_storage_unlock(); > put_pid(pid); > > That reference count bump on struct pid seems unnecessary and I suspect > your lookup routines are supposed to be fast. So why don't you just > open-code this. Something like: > > diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_task_storage.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_task_storage.c > index bf7fa15fdcc6..dc36a33c7b6d 100644 > --- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_task_storage.c > +++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_task_storage.c > @@ -92,10 +92,12 @@ static void *bpf_pid_task_storage_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key) > struct task_struct *task; > unsigned int f_flags; > struct pid *pid; > - int fd, err; > > - fd = *(int *)key; > - pid = pidfd_get_pid(fd, &f_flags); > + CLASS(fd, f)(*(int *)key); > + if (fd_empty(f)) > + return -EBADF; > + > + pid = pidfd_pid(f); > if (IS_ERR(pid)) > return ERR_CAST(pid); > > @@ -104,19 +106,13 @@ static void *bpf_pid_task_storage_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key) > */ > WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_read_lock_held()); > task = pid_task(pid, PIDTYPE_PID); > - if (!task) { > - err = -ENOENT; > - goto out; > - } > + if (!task) > + return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT); > > bpf_task_storage_lock(); > sdata = task_storage_lookup(task, map, true); > bpf_task_storage_unlock(); > - put_pid(pid); > return sdata ? sdata->data : NULL; > -out: > - put_pid(pid); > - return ERR_PTR(err); > } > > which avoids the reference count bumps on @pid. > It remains pinned by the pidfd anyway. The "bpf_pid_task_storage_lookup_elem()" is used by the syscall path which may be less looked at. The bpf prog uses another function "__bpf_task_storage_get()" which directly has a task pointer. The change makes sense to me. A nice improvement on the syscall path. It will be great if you can post a patch for it. Thanks.
diff --git a/kernel/bpf/bpf_task_storage.c b/kernel/bpf/bpf_task_storage.c index bf7fa15fdcc6..dc36a33c7b6d 100644 --- a/kernel/bpf/bpf_task_storage.c +++ b/kernel/bpf/bpf_task_storage.c @@ -92,10 +92,12 @@ static void *bpf_pid_task_storage_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key) struct task_struct *task; unsigned int f_flags; struct pid *pid; - int fd, err; - fd = *(int *)key; - pid = pidfd_get_pid(fd, &f_flags); + CLASS(fd, f)(*(int *)key); + if (fd_empty(f)) + return -EBADF; + + pid = pidfd_pid(f); if (IS_ERR(pid)) return ERR_CAST(pid); @@ -104,19 +106,13 @@ static void *bpf_pid_task_storage_lookup_elem(struct bpf_map *map, void *key) */ WARN_ON_ONCE(!rcu_read_lock_held()); task = pid_task(pid, PIDTYPE_PID); - if (!task) { - err = -ENOENT; - goto out; - } + if (!task) + return ERR_PTR(-ENOENT); bpf_task_storage_lock(); sdata = task_storage_lookup(task, map, true); bpf_task_storage_unlock(); - put_pid(pid); return sdata ? sdata->data : NULL; -out: - put_pid(pid); - return ERR_PTR(err); } which avoids the reference count bumps on @pid.