CVE-2025-38063
09h33 +00:00
CVE 描述
dm: fix unconditional IO throttle caused by REQ_PREFLUSH
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: dm: fix unconditional IO throttle caused by REQ_PREFLUSH When a bio with REQ_PREFLUSH is submitted to dm, __send_empty_flush() generates a flush_bio with REQ_OP_WRITE | REQ_PREFLUSH | REQ_SYNC, which causes the flush_bio to be throttled by wbt_wait(). An example from v5.4, similar problem also exists in upstream: crash> bt 2091206 PID: 2091206 TASK: ffff2050df92a300 CPU: 109 COMMAND: "kworker/u260:0" #0 [ffff800084a2f7f0] __switch_to at ffff80004008aeb8 #1 [ffff800084a2f820] __schedule at ffff800040bfa0c4 #2 [ffff800084a2f880] schedule at ffff800040bfa4b4 #3 [ffff800084a2f8a0] io_schedule at ffff800040bfa9c4 #4 [ffff800084a2f8c0] rq_qos_wait at ffff8000405925bc #5 [ffff800084a2f940] wbt_wait at ffff8000405bb3a0 #6 [ffff800084a2f9a0] __rq_qos_throttle at ffff800040592254 #7 [ffff800084a2f9c0] blk_mq_make_request at ffff80004057cf38 #8 [ffff800084a2fa60] generic_make_request at ffff800040570138 #9 [ffff800084a2fae0] submit_bio at ffff8000405703b4 #10 [ffff800084a2fb50] xlog_write_iclog at ffff800001280834 [xfs] #11 [ffff800084a2fbb0] xlog_sync at ffff800001280c3c [xfs] #12 [ffff800084a2fbf0] xlog_state_release_iclog at ffff800001280df4 [xfs] #13 [ffff800084a2fc10] xlog_write at ffff80000128203c [xfs] #14 [ffff800084a2fcd0] xlog_cil_push at ffff8000012846dc [xfs] #15 [ffff800084a2fda0] xlog_cil_push_work at ffff800001284a2c [xfs] #16 [ffff800084a2fdb0] process_one_work at ffff800040111d08 #17 [ffff800084a2fe00] worker_thread at ffff8000401121cc #18 [ffff800084a2fe70] kthread at ffff800040118de4 After commit 2def2845cc33 ("xfs: don't allow log IO to be throttled"), the metadata submitted by xlog_write_iclog() should not be throttled. But due to the existence of the dm layer, throttling flush_bio indirectly causes the metadata bio to be throttled. Fix this by conditionally adding REQ_IDLE to flush_bio.bi_opf, which makes wbt_should_throttle() return false to avoid wbt_wait().CVE 信息
相关弱点
| 弱点名称 | 来源 | |
|---|---|---|
| 暂无信息。 |
指标
| 指标 | 评分 | 严重程度 | CVSS 向量 | 来源 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| V3.1 | 5.5 | MEDIUM |
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
更多信息
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 评分
EPSS 百分位
相关产品
配置 0
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 至（不含） 6.1.141
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从（含） 6.2 至（不含） 6.6.93
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从（含） 6.7 至（不含） 6.12.31
Linux>>Linux_kernel >> Version 从（含） 6.13 至（不含） 6.14.9
配置 0
Debian>>Debian_linux >> Version 11.0
