counter: interrupt-cnt: Drop IRQF_NO_THREAD flag
- Published
- Last modified
- Where the record stands: published, rejected by its publisher, or superseded by another id.What do these mean? →
- published
- Whether CISA lists it in its Known Exploited Vulnerabilities catalog: proof that attackers are using it.What do these mean? →
- Not listed in CISA KEV
- Whether working attack code is public (Exploit-DB, Metasploit, Nuclei or GitHub). Public code makes attacks easier.What do these mean? →
- None on Exploit-DB, Metasploit or GitHub
Summary
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: counter: interrupt-cnt: Drop IRQF_NO_THREAD flag An IRQ handler can either be IRQF_NO_THREAD or acquire spinlock_t, as CONFIG_PROVE_RAW_LOCK_NESTING warns: ============================= [ BUG: Invalid wait context ] 6.18.0-rc1+git... #1 ----------------------------- some-user-space-process/1251 is trying to lock: (&counter->events_list_lock){....}-{3:3}, at: counter_push_event [counter] other info that might help us debug this: context-{2:2} no locks held by some-user-space-process/.... stack backtrace: CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 1251 Comm: some-user-space-process 6.18.0-rc1+git... #1 PREEMPT Call trace: show_stack (C) dump_stack_lvl dump_stack __lock_acquire lock_acquire _raw_spin_lock_irqsave counter_push_event [counter] interrupt_cnt_isr [interrupt_cnt] __handle_irq_event_percpu handle_irq_event handle_simple_irq handle_irq_desc generic_handle_domain_irq gpio_irq_handler handle_irq_desc generic_handle_domain_irq gic_handle_irq call_on_irq_stack do_interrupt_handler el0_interrupt __el0_irq_handler_common el0t_64_irq_handler el0t_64_irq ... and Sebastian correctly points out. Remove IRQF_NO_THREAD as an alternative to switching to raw_spinlock_t, because the latter would limit all potential nested locks to raw_spinlock_t only.
Timeline
- CVE published
- Record last updated
Affected versions
- Linux Linux
Version range not reported
- Linux Linux
5.13