Lucene search

K
nvd416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67NVD:CVE-2024-27005
HistoryMay 01, 2024 - 6:15 a.m.

CVE-2024-27005

2024-05-0106:15:18
416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
web.nvd.nist.gov
linux kernel
cve-2024-27005
vulnerability
icc_lock mutex
req_list
races
mutexes
locking
runpm
reclaim

7.3 High

AI Score

Confidence

High

0.0004 Low

EPSS

Percentile

15.7%

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

interconnect: Don’t access req_list while it’s being manipulated

The icc_lock mutex was split into separate icc_lock and icc_bw_lock
mutexes in [1] to avoid lockdep splats. However, this didn’t adequately
protect access to icc_node::req_list.

The icc_set_bw() function will eventually iterate over req_list while
only holding icc_bw_lock, but req_list can be modified while only
holding icc_lock. This causes races between icc_set_bw(), of_icc_get(),
and icc_put().

Example A:

CPU0 CPU1


icc_set_bw(path_a)
mutex_lock(&icc_bw_lock);
icc_put(path_b)
mutex_lock(&icc_lock);
aggregate_requests()
hlist_for_each_entry(r, …
hlist_del(…
<r = invalid pointer>

Example B:

CPU0 CPU1


icc_set_bw(path_a)
mutex_lock(&icc_bw_lock);
path_b = of_icc_get()
of_icc_get_by_index()
mutex_lock(&icc_lock);
path_find()
path_init()
aggregate_requests()
hlist_for_each_entry(r, …
hlist_add_head(…
<r = invalid pointer>

Fix this by ensuring icc_bw_lock is always held before manipulating
icc_node::req_list. The additional places icc_bw_lock is held don’t
perform any memory allocations, so we should still be safe from the
original lockdep splats that motivated the separate locks.

[1] commit af42269c3523 (“interconnect: Fix locking for runpm vs reclaim”)

7.3 High

AI Score

Confidence

High

0.0004 Low

EPSS

Percentile

15.7%