CVE-2025-39843
CVE Descriptions
mm: slub: avoid wake up kswapd in set_track_prepare
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm: slub: avoid wake up kswapd in set_track_prepare set_track_prepare() can incur lock recursion. The issue is that it is called from hrtimer_start_range_ns holding the per_cpu(hrtimer_bases)[n].lock, but when enabled CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_TIMERS, may wake up kswapd in set_track_prepare, and try to hold the per_cpu(hrtimer_bases)[n].lock. Avoid deadlock caused by implicitly waking up kswapd by passing in allocation flags, which do not contain __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM in the debug_objects_fill_pool() case. Inside stack depot they are processed by gfp_nested_mask(). Since ___slab_alloc() has preemption disabled, we mask out __GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM from the flags there. The oops looks something like: BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#3, swapper/3/0 lock: 0xffffff8a4bf29c80, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: swapper/3/0, .owner_cpu: 3 Hardware name: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Popsicle based on SM8850 (DT) Call trace: spin_bug+0x0 _raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x80 hrtimer_try_to_cancel+0x94 task_contending+0x10c enqueue_dl_entity+0x2a4 dl_server_start+0x74 enqueue_task_fair+0x568 enqueue_task+0xac do_activate_task+0x14c ttwu_do_activate+0xcc try_to_wake_up+0x6c8 default_wake_function+0x20 autoremove_wake_function+0x1c __wake_up+0xac wakeup_kswapd+0x19c wake_all_kswapds+0x78 __alloc_pages_slowpath+0x1ac __alloc_pages_noprof+0x298 stack_depot_save_flags+0x6b0 stack_depot_save+0x14 set_track_prepare+0x5c ___slab_alloc+0xccc __kmalloc_cache_noprof+0x470 __set_page_owner+0x2bc post_alloc_hook[jt]+0x1b8 prep_new_page+0x28 get_page_from_freelist+0x1edc __alloc_pages_noprof+0x13c alloc_slab_page+0x244 allocate_slab+0x7c ___slab_alloc+0x8e8 kmem_cache_alloc_noprof+0x450 debug_objects_fill_pool+0x22c debug_object_activate+0x40 enqueue_hrtimer[jt]+0xdc hrtimer_start_range_ns+0x5f8 ...CVE Informations
Related Weaknesses
| Weakness Name | Source | |
|---|---|---|
| Improper Locking The product does not properly acquire or release a lock on a resource, leading to unexpected resource state changes and behaviors. |
Metrics
| Metrics | Score | Severity | CVSS Vector | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 5.5 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
More informations
Base: Exploitabilty MetricsThe Exploitability metrics reflect the characteristics of the thing that is vulnerable, which we refer to formally as the vulnerable component. Attack Vector This metric reflects the context by which vulnerability exploitation is possible. Local The vulnerable component is not bound to the network stack and the attacker’s path is via read/write/execute capabilities. Attack Complexity This metric describes the conditions beyond the attacker’s control that must exist in order to exploit the vulnerability. Low Specialized access conditions or extenuating circumstances do not exist. An attacker can expect repeatable success when attacking the vulnerable component. Privileges Required This metric describes the level of privileges an attacker must possess before successfully exploiting the vulnerability. Low The attacker requires privileges that provide basic user capabilities that could normally affect only settings and files owned by a user. Alternatively, an attacker with Low privileges has the ability to access only non-sensitive resources. User Interaction This metric captures the requirement for a human user, other than the attacker, to participate in the successful compromise of the vulnerable component. None The vulnerable system can be exploited without interaction from any user. Base: Scope MetricsThe Scope metric captures whether a vulnerability in one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope. Scope Formally, a security authority is a mechanism (e.g., an application, an operating system, firmware, a sandbox environment) that defines and enforces access control in terms of how certain subjects/actors (e.g., human users, processes) can access certain restricted objects/resources (e.g., files, CPU, memory) in a controlled manner. All the subjects and objects under the jurisdiction of a single security authority are considered to be under one security scope. If a vulnerability in a vulnerable component can affect a component which is in a different security scope than the vulnerable component, a Scope change occurs. Intuitively, whenever the impact of a vulnerability breaches a security/trust boundary and impacts components outside the security scope in which vulnerable component resides, a Scope change occurs. Unchanged An exploited vulnerability can only affect resources managed by the same security authority. In this case, the vulnerable component and the impacted component are either the same, or both are managed by the same security authority. Base: Impact MetricsThe Impact metrics capture the effects of a successfully exploited vulnerability on the component that suffers the worst outcome that is most directly and predictably associated with the attack. Analysts should constrain impacts to a reasonable, final outcome which they are confident an attacker is able to achieve. Confidentiality Impact This metric measures the impact to the confidentiality of the information resources managed by a software component due to a successfully exploited vulnerability. None There is no loss of confidentiality within the impacted component. Integrity Impact This metric measures the impact to integrity of a successfully exploited vulnerability. Integrity refers to the trustworthiness and veracity of information. None There is no loss of integrity within the impacted component. Availability Impact This metric measures the impact to the availability of the impacted component resulting from a successfully exploited vulnerability. High There is a total loss of availability, resulting in the attacker being able to fully deny access to resources in the impacted component; this loss is either sustained (while the attacker continues to deliver the attack) or persistent (the condition persists even after the attack has completed). Alternatively, the attacker has the ability to deny some availability, but the loss of availability presents a direct, serious consequence to the impacted component (e.g., the attacker cannot disrupt existing connections, but can prevent new connections; the attacker can repeatedly exploit a vulnerability that, in each instance of a successful attack, leaks a only small amount of memory, but after repeated exploitation causes a service to become completely unavailable). Temporal MetricsThe Temporal metrics measure the current state of exploit techniques or code availability, the existence of any patches or workarounds, or the confidence in the description of a vulnerability. Environmental MetricsThese metrics enable the analyst to customize the CVSS score depending on the importance of the affected IT asset to a user’s organization, measured in terms of Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability. |
nvd@nist.gov |
EPSS
EPSS Score
EPSS Percentile
Products Mentioned
Configuraton 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 5.19 To (excluding) 6.1.151
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.2 To (excluding) 6.6.105
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.7 To (excluding) 6.12.46
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version From (including) 6.13 To (excluding) 6.16.6
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.17
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.17
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.17
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 6.17
Configuraton 0
Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 11.0
References
Tags : Mailing List, Third Party Advisory
