Re: [PATCH v2 bpf-next 1/4] bpf: introduce task_vma bpf_iter

On Tue, Dec 15, 2020 at 03:36:59PM -0800, Song Liu wrote:

+/*
+ * Key information from vm_area_struct. We need this because we cannot
+ * assume the vm_area_struct is still valid after each iteration.
+ */
+struct __vm_area_struct {
+	__u64 start;
+	__u64 end;
+	__u64 flags;
+	__u64 pgoff;
+};

Where it's inside .c or exposed in uapi/bpf.h it will become uapi
if it's used this way. Let's switch to arbitrary BTF-based access instead.

+static struct __vm_area_struct *
+task_vma_seq_get_next(struct bpf_iter_seq_task_vma_info *info)
+{
+	struct pid_namespace *ns = info->common.ns;
+	struct task_struct *curr_task;
+	struct vm_area_struct *vma;
+	u32 curr_tid = info->tid;
+	bool new_task = false;
+
+	/* If this function returns a non-NULL __vm_area_struct, it held
+	 * a reference to the task_struct. If info->file is non-NULL, it
+	 * also holds a reference to the file. If this function returns
+	 * NULL, it does not hold any reference.
+	 */
+again:
+	if (info->task) {
+		curr_task = info->task;
+	} else {
+		curr_task = task_seq_get_next(ns, &curr_tid, true);
+		if (!curr_task) {
+			info->task = NULL;
+			info->tid++;
+			return NULL;
+		}
+
+		if (curr_tid != info->tid) {
+			info->tid = curr_tid;
+			new_task = true;
+		}
+
+		if (!curr_task->mm)
+			goto next_task;
+		info->task = curr_task;
+	}
+
+	mmap_read_lock(curr_task->mm);

That will hurt. /proc readers do that and it causes all sorts
of production issues. We cannot take this lock.
There is no need to take it.
Switch the whole thing to probe_read style walking.
And reimplement find_vma with probe_read while omitting vmacache.
It will be short rbtree walk.
bpf prog doesn't need to see a stable struct. It will read it through ptr_to_btf_id
which will use probe_read equivalent underneath.