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.
Advisories
Source ID Title
EUVD EUVD EUVD-2025-27861 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.
Ubuntu USN Ubuntu USN USN-7699-1 Linux kernel vulnerabilities
Ubuntu USN Ubuntu USN USN-7699-2 Linux kernel (HWE) vulnerabilities
Ubuntu USN Ubuntu USN USN-7721-1 Linux kernel (Azure) vulnerabilities
Fixes

Solution

No solution given by the vendor.


Workaround

No workaround given by the vendor.

History

Mon, 17 Nov 2025 13:00:00 +0000

Type Values Removed Values Added
Weaknesses CWE-362
CPEs cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc4:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc5:*:*:*:*:*:*
cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc6:*:*:*:*:*:*
Metrics cvssV3_1

{'score': 7.0, 'vector': 'CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H'}

cvssV3_1

{'score': 4.7, 'vector': 'CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H'}


Fri, 20 Jun 2025 23:15:00 +0000

Type Values Removed Values Added
References
Metrics threat_severity

None

cvssV3_1

{'score': 7.0, 'vector': 'CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H'}

threat_severity

Moderate


Wed, 18 Jun 2025 09:45:00 +0000

Type Values Removed Values Added
Description 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.
Title mm/page_alloc: fix race condition in unaccepted memory handling
References

cve-icon MITRE

Status: PUBLISHED

Assigner: Linux

Published:

Updated: 2025-06-18T09:28:19.358Z

Reserved: 2025-04-16T04:51:23.977Z

Link: CVE-2025-38008

cve-icon Vulnrichment

No data.

cve-icon NVD

Status : Analyzed

Published: 2025-06-18T10:15:32.037

Modified: 2025-11-17T12:56:52.697

Link: CVE-2025-38008

cve-icon Redhat

Severity : Moderate

Publid Date: 2025-06-18T00:00:00Z

Links: CVE-2025-38008 - Bugzilla

cve-icon OpenCVE Enrichment

Updated: 2025-06-23T08:53:47Z