In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
rcu: Protect rcu_print_task_exp_stall() ->exp_tasks access
For kernels built with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU=y, the following scenario can
result in a NULL-pointer dereference:
CPU1 CPU2
rcu_preempt_deferred_qs_irqrestore rcu_print_task_exp_stall
if (special.b.blocked) READ_ONCE(rnp->exp_tasks) != NULL
raw_spin_lock_rcu_node
np = rcu_next_node_entry(t, rnp)
if (&t->rcu_node_entry == rnp->exp_tasks)
WRITE_ONCE(rnp->exp_tasks, np)
....
raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node
raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node
t = list_entry(rnp->exp_tasks->prev,
struct task_struct, rcu_node_entry)
(if rnp->exp_tasks is NULL, this
will dereference a NULL pointer)
The problem is that CPU2 accesses the rcu_node structure's->exp_tasks
field without holding the rcu_node structure's ->lock and CPU2 did
not observe CPU1's change to rcu_node structure's ->exp_tasks in time.
Therefore, if CPU1 sets rcu_node structure's->exp_tasks pointer to NULL,
then CPU2 might dereference that NULL pointer.
This commit therefore holds the rcu_node structure's ->lock while
accessing that structure's->exp_tasks field.
[ paulmck: Apply Frederic Weisbecker feedback. ]
Metrics
Affected Vendors & Products
References
History
Fri, 19 Sep 2025 09:45:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| First Time appeared |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| Vendors & Products |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
Fri, 19 Sep 2025 00:15:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| References |
| |
| Metrics |
threat_severity
|
cvssV3_1
|
Thu, 18 Sep 2025 16:15:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: rcu: Protect rcu_print_task_exp_stall() ->exp_tasks access For kernels built with CONFIG_PREEMPT_RCU=y, the following scenario can result in a NULL-pointer dereference: CPU1 CPU2 rcu_preempt_deferred_qs_irqrestore rcu_print_task_exp_stall if (special.b.blocked) READ_ONCE(rnp->exp_tasks) != NULL raw_spin_lock_rcu_node np = rcu_next_node_entry(t, rnp) if (&t->rcu_node_entry == rnp->exp_tasks) WRITE_ONCE(rnp->exp_tasks, np) .... raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore_rcu_node raw_spin_lock_irqsave_rcu_node t = list_entry(rnp->exp_tasks->prev, struct task_struct, rcu_node_entry) (if rnp->exp_tasks is NULL, this will dereference a NULL pointer) The problem is that CPU2 accesses the rcu_node structure's->exp_tasks field without holding the rcu_node structure's ->lock and CPU2 did not observe CPU1's change to rcu_node structure's ->exp_tasks in time. Therefore, if CPU1 sets rcu_node structure's->exp_tasks pointer to NULL, then CPU2 might dereference that NULL pointer. This commit therefore holds the rcu_node structure's ->lock while accessing that structure's->exp_tasks field. [ paulmck: Apply Frederic Weisbecker feedback. ] | |
| Title | rcu: Protect rcu_print_task_exp_stall() ->exp_tasks access | |
| References |
|
|
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published: 2025-09-18T16:04:02.955Z
Updated: 2025-09-18T16:04:02.955Z
Reserved: 2025-09-17T14:54:09.741Z
Link: CVE-2023-53419
No data.
Status : Received
Published: 2025-09-18T16:15:45.650
Modified: 2025-09-18T16:15:45.650
Link: CVE-2023-53419