Re: [PATCH v2 1/3] binder: handle PID namespace conversion for freeze operation

[jongan.kim@lge.com]

Alice Ryhl @ 2026-01-29 10:41 UTC wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 29, 2026 at 05:41:17PM +0900, jongan.kim@lge.com wrote:
> > From: JongAn Kim <jongan.kim@lge.com>
> >
> > Currently, when a freeze is attempted from a non-init PID namespace,
> > there is a possibility that the wrong process in the init namespace
> > may be frozen due to PID collision across namespaces.
> >
> > For example, if a container with PID namespace has a process with
> > PID 100 (which maps to PID 5000 in init namespace), attempting to
> > freeze PID 100 from the container could incorrectly match a different
> > process with PID 100 in the init namespace.
> >
> > This patch fixes the issue by:
> > 1. Converting the caller's PID from their namespace to init namespace
> > 2. Matching against binder_proc->pid (which stores init namespace TGID)
> > 3. Returning -EINVAL for invalid PIDs and -ESRCH for not-found processes
> >
> > This change ensures correct PID handling when binder freeze occurs in
> > non-init PID namespace.
> >
> > Signed-off-by: JongAn Kim <jongan.kim@lge.com>
> 
> > +     rcu_read_lock();
> > +     task = pid_task(find_vpid(pid), PIDTYPE_PID);
> > +     init_ns_pid = task ? task_tgid_nr_ns(task, &init_pid_ns) : -ESRCH;
> 
> You know this is making me think ... here we are obtaining a pointer to
> the `struct task_struct`, then we convert it to a pid, and we compare
> with the pid of the binder_proc's task.
> 
> Why not just outright compare the `struct task_struct` pointers?

Thanks for review and feedback. I hadn't considered that.
I will update patch to compare by using `struct task_struct` pointers.

Thanks. // JongAn, Kim