Re: [PATCH v1 1/1] binder: fix freeze race
From: Li Li
Date: Thu Sep 09 2021 - 23:33:17 EST
Hi Todd,
Thanks for reviewing the patch! Please see my reply below.
And I'll send out v2 soon addressing your concerns.
On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 4:54 PM Todd Kjos <tkjos@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Thu, Sep 9, 2021 at 4:21 PM Li Li <dualli@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > From: Li Li <dualli@xxxxxxxxxx>
> >
> > Currently cgroup freezer is used to freeze the application threads, and
> > BINDER_FREEZE is used to freeze binder interface. There's already a
> > mechanism for BINDER_FREEZE to wait for any existing transactions to
> > drain out before actually freezing the binder interface.
> >
> > But freezing an app requires 2 steps, freezing the binder interface with
> > BINDER_FREEZEwhich and then freezing the application main threads with
> > cgroupfs. This is not an atomic operation. The following race issue
> > might happen.
> >
> > 1) Binder interface is frozen by ioctl(BINDER_FREEZE);
> > 2) Main thread initiates a new sync binder transaction;
> > 3) Main thread is frozen by "echo 1 > cgroup.freeze";
> > 4) The response reaches the frozen thread, which will unexpectedly fail.
> >
> > This patch provides a mechanism for user space freezer manager to check
> > if there's any new pending transaction happening between BINDER_FREEZE
> > and freezing main thread. If there's any, the main thread freezing
> > operation can be rolled back.
> >
> > Furthermore, the response might reach the binder driver before the
> > rollback actually happens. That will also cause failed transaction.
> >
> > As the other process doesn't wait for another response of the response,
> > the failed response transaction can be fixed by treating the response
> > transaction like an oneway/async one, allowing it to reach the frozen
> > thread. And it will be consumed when the thread gets unfrozen later.
> >
> > Bug: 198493121
>
> Please remove "Bug: " tag. Replace it with a "Fixes:" tag that cites
> the patch that introduced the race.
>
Done in v2.
> > Signed-off-by: Li Li <dualli@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > ---
> > drivers/android/binder.c | 32 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++----
> > drivers/android/binder_internal.h | 2 ++
> > 2 files changed, 30 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-)
> >
> > diff --git a/drivers/android/binder.c b/drivers/android/binder.c
> > index d9030cb6b1e4..f9713a97578c 100644
> > --- a/drivers/android/binder.c
> > +++ b/drivers/android/binder.c
> > @@ -3038,9 +3038,8 @@ static void binder_transaction(struct binder_proc *proc,
> > if (reply) {
> > binder_enqueue_thread_work(thread, tcomplete);
> > binder_inner_proc_lock(target_proc);
> > - if (target_thread->is_dead || target_proc->is_frozen) {
> > - return_error = target_thread->is_dead ?
> > - BR_DEAD_REPLY : BR_FROZEN_REPLY;
> > + if (target_thread->is_dead) {
> > + return_error = BR_DEAD_REPLY;
> > binder_inner_proc_unlock(target_proc);
> > goto err_dead_proc_or_thread;
> > }
> > @@ -4648,6 +4647,22 @@ static int binder_ioctl_get_node_debug_info(struct binder_proc *proc,
> > return 0;
> > }
> >
> > +static int binder_txns_pending(struct binder_proc *proc)
> > +{
> > + struct rb_node *n;
> > + struct binder_thread *thread;
> > +
> > + if (proc->outstanding_txns > 0)
> > + return 1;
> > +
> > + for (n = rb_first(&proc->threads); n; n = rb_next(n)) {
> > + thread = rb_entry(n, struct binder_thread, rb_node);
> > + if (thread->transaction_stack)
> > + return 1;
> > + }
> > + return 0;
> > +}
> > +
> > static int binder_ioctl_freeze(struct binder_freeze_info *info,
> > struct binder_proc *target_proc)
> > {
> > @@ -4682,6 +4697,14 @@ static int binder_ioctl_freeze(struct binder_freeze_info *info,
> > if (!ret && target_proc->outstanding_txns)
> > ret = -EAGAIN;
> >
> > + /* Also check pending transactions that wait for reply */
> > + if (ret >= 0) {
> > + binder_inner_proc_lock(target_proc);
> > + if (binder_txns_pending(target_proc))
>
> The convention in the binder driver is to append "_ilocked" to the
> function name if the function expects the inner proc lock to be held
> (so "binder_txns_pending_ilocked(target_proc) in this case)".
>
Done in v2.
> > + ret = -EAGAIN;
> > + binder_inner_proc_unlock(target_proc);
> > + }
> > +
> > if (ret < 0) {
> > binder_inner_proc_lock(target_proc);
> > target_proc->is_frozen = false;
> > @@ -4705,7 +4728,8 @@ static int binder_ioctl_get_freezer_info(
> > if (target_proc->pid == info->pid) {
> > found = true;
> > binder_inner_proc_lock(target_proc);
> > - info->sync_recv |= target_proc->sync_recv;
> > + info->sync_recv |= target_proc->sync_recv |
> > + (binder_txns_pending(target_proc) << 1);
> > info->async_recv |= target_proc->async_recv;
> > binder_inner_proc_unlock(target_proc);
> > }
> > diff --git a/drivers/android/binder_internal.h b/drivers/android/binder_internal.h
> > index 810c0b84d3f8..402c4d4362a8 100644
> > --- a/drivers/android/binder_internal.h
> > +++ b/drivers/android/binder_internal.h
> > @@ -378,6 +378,8 @@ struct binder_ref {
> > * binder transactions
> > * (protected by @inner_lock)
> > * @sync_recv: process received sync transactions since last frozen
> > + * bit 0: received sync transaction after being frozen
> > + * bit 1: new pending sync transaction during freezing
>
> Should these bit assignments be documented in binder.h since these bit
> assignments end up being relevant in struct binder_frozen_status_info?
>
Done in v2.
>
> > * (protected by @inner_lock)
> > * @async_recv: process received async transactions since last frozen
> > * (protected by @inner_lock)
> > --
> > 2.33.0.309.g3052b89438-goog
> >