Re: [PATCH 1/1 v3 bpf-next] bpf: increment and use correct thread iterator

[Jonathan Lemon]

On Fri, Dec 11, 2020 at 12:23:34PM -0800, Andrii Nakryiko wrote:
> > @@ -164,7 +164,7 @@ task_file_seq_get_next(struct 
> > bpf_iter_seq_task_file_info *info)
> >                 curr_files = get_files_struct(curr_task);
> >                 if (!curr_files) {
> >                         put_task_struct(curr_task);
> > -                       curr_tid = ++(info->tid);
> > +                       curr_tid = curr_tid + 1;
> 
> Yonghong might know definitively, but it seems like we need to update
> info->tid here as well:
> 
> info->tid = curr_tid;
> 
> If the search eventually yields no task, then info->tid will stay at
> some potentially much smaller value, and we'll keep re-searching tasks
> from the same TID on each subsequent read (if user keeps reading the
> file). So corner case, but good to have covered.

That applies earlier as well:

                curr_task = task_seq_get_next(ns, &curr_tid, true);
                if (!curr_task) {
                        info->task = NULL;
                        info->files = NULL;
                        return NULL;
                }

The logic seems to be "if task == NULL, then return NULL and stop". 
Is the seq_iterator allowed to continue/restart if seq_next returns NULL?
--
Jonathan