CVE-2025-38008
mm/page_alloc: fix race condition in unaccepted memory handling
Severity Score
Exploit Likelihood
Affected Versions
Public Exploits
0Exploited in Wild
-Decision
Descriptions
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/page_alloc: fix race condition in unaccepted memory handling The page allocator tracks the number of zones that have unaccepted memory
using static_branch_enc/dec() and uses that static branch in hot paths to
determine if it needs to deal with unaccepted memory. Borislav and Thomas pointed out that the tracking is racy: operations on
static_branch are not serialized against adding/removing unaccepted pages
to/from the zone. Sanity checks inside static_branch machinery detects it: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 10 at kernel/jump_label.c:276 __static_key_slow_dec_cpuslocked+0x8e/0xa0 The comment around the WARN() explains the problem: /* * Warn about the '-1' case though; since that means a * decrement is concurrent with a first (0->1) increment. IOW * people are trying to disable something that wasn't yet fully * enabled. This suggests an ordering problem on the user side. */ The effect of this static_branch optimization is only visible on
microbenchmark. Instead of adding more complexity around it, remove it altogether.
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/page_alloc: fix race condition in unaccepted memory handling The page allocator tracks the number of zones that have unaccepted memory using static_branch_enc/dec() and uses that static branch in hot paths to determine if it needs to deal with unaccepted memory. Borislav and Thomas pointed out that the tracking is racy: operations on static_branch are not serialized against adding/removing unaccepted pages to/from the zone. Sanity checks inside static_branch machinery detects it: WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 10 at kernel/jump_label.c:276 __static_key_slow_dec_cpuslocked+0x8e/0xa0 The comment around the WARN() explains the problem: /* * Warn about the '-1' case though; since that means a * decrement is concurrent with a first (0->1) increment. IOW * people are trying to disable something that wasn't yet fully * enabled. This suggests an ordering problem on the user side. */ The effect of this static_branch optimization is only visible on microbenchmark. Instead of adding more complexity around it, remove it altogether.
CVSS Scores
SSVC
- Decision:-
Timeline
- 2025-04-16 CVE Reserved
- 2025-06-18 CVE Published
- 2025-06-18 CVE Updated
- 2025-06-18 EPSS Updated
- ---------- Exploited in Wild
- ---------- KEV Due Date
- ---------- First Exploit
CWE
CAPEC
References (5)
URL | Tag | Source |
---|---|---|
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/dcdfdd40fa82b6704d2841938e5c8ec3051eb0d6 | Vuln. Introduced |
URL | Date | SRC |
---|
URL | Date | SRC |
---|
Affected Vendors, Products, and Versions
Vendor | Product | Version | Other | Status | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
Vendor | Product | Version | Other | Status | <-- --> | Vendor | Product | Version | Other | Status |
Linux Search vendor "Linux" | Linux Kernel Search vendor "Linux" for product "Linux Kernel" | >= 6.5 < 6.6.92 Search vendor "Linux" for product "Linux Kernel" and version " >= 6.5 < 6.6.92" | en |
Affected
| ||||||
Linux Search vendor "Linux" | Linux Kernel Search vendor "Linux" for product "Linux Kernel" | >= 6.5 < 6.12.30 Search vendor "Linux" for product "Linux Kernel" and version " >= 6.5 < 6.12.30" | en |
Affected
| ||||||
Linux Search vendor "Linux" | Linux Kernel Search vendor "Linux" for product "Linux Kernel" | >= 6.5 < 6.14.8 Search vendor "Linux" for product "Linux Kernel" and version " >= 6.5 < 6.14.8" | en |
Affected
| ||||||
Linux Search vendor "Linux" | Linux Kernel Search vendor "Linux" for product "Linux Kernel" | >= 6.5 < 6.15 Search vendor "Linux" for product "Linux Kernel" and version " >= 6.5 < 6.15" | en |
Affected
|