In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
rust_binder: remove spin_lock() in rust_shrink_free_page()
When forward-porting Rust Binder to 6.18, I neglected to take commit
fb56fdf8b9a2 ("mm/list_lru: split the lock to per-cgroup scope") into
account, and apparently I did not end up running the shrinker callback
when I sanity tested the driver before submission. This leads to crashes
like the following:
============================================
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
6.18.0-mainline-maybe-dirty #1 Tainted: G IO
--------------------------------------------
kswapd0/68 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff956000fa18b0 (&l->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: lock_list_lru_of_memcg+0x128/0x230
but task is already holding lock:
ffff956000fa18b0 (&l->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: rust_helper_spin_lock+0xd/0x20
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(&l->lock);
lock(&l->lock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
3 locks held by kswapd0/68:
#0: ffffffff90d2e260 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: kswapd+0x597/0x1160
#1: ffff956000fa18b0 (&l->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: rust_helper_spin_lock+0xd/0x20
#2: ffffffff90cf3680 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: lock_list_lru_of_memcg+0x2d/0x230
To fix this, remove the spin_lock() call from rust_shrink_free_page().
rust_binder: remove spin_lock() in rust_shrink_free_page()
When forward-porting Rust Binder to 6.18, I neglected to take commit
fb56fdf8b9a2 ("mm/list_lru: split the lock to per-cgroup scope") into
account, and apparently I did not end up running the shrinker callback
when I sanity tested the driver before submission. This leads to crashes
like the following:
============================================
WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
6.18.0-mainline-maybe-dirty #1 Tainted: G IO
--------------------------------------------
kswapd0/68 is trying to acquire lock:
ffff956000fa18b0 (&l->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: lock_list_lru_of_memcg+0x128/0x230
but task is already holding lock:
ffff956000fa18b0 (&l->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: rust_helper_spin_lock+0xd/0x20
other info that might help us debug this:
Possible unsafe locking scenario:
CPU0
----
lock(&l->lock);
lock(&l->lock);
*** DEADLOCK ***
May be due to missing lock nesting notation
3 locks held by kswapd0/68:
#0: ffffffff90d2e260 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: kswapd+0x597/0x1160
#1: ffff956000fa18b0 (&l->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: rust_helper_spin_lock+0xd/0x20
#2: ffffffff90cf3680 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: lock_list_lru_of_memcg+0x2d/0x230
To fix this, remove the spin_lock() call from rust_shrink_free_page().
Tracking
Sign in to view the affected projects.
Advisories
No advisories yet.
Fixes
Solution
No solution given by the vendor.
Workaround
No workaround given by the vendor.
References
History
Wed, 25 Mar 2026 19:45:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Weaknesses | CWE-667 | |
| CPEs | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.18:-:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc4:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc5:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc6:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc7:*:*:*:*:*:* cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.19:rc8:*:*:*:*:*:* |
|
| Metrics |
cvssV3_1
|
Mon, 02 Feb 2026 12:15:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| References |
|
Sat, 31 Jan 2026 11:45:00 +0000
| Type | Values Removed | Values Added |
|---|---|---|
| Description | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: rust_binder: remove spin_lock() in rust_shrink_free_page() When forward-porting Rust Binder to 6.18, I neglected to take commit fb56fdf8b9a2 ("mm/list_lru: split the lock to per-cgroup scope") into account, and apparently I did not end up running the shrinker callback when I sanity tested the driver before submission. This leads to crashes like the following: ============================================ WARNING: possible recursive locking detected 6.18.0-mainline-maybe-dirty #1 Tainted: G IO -------------------------------------------- kswapd0/68 is trying to acquire lock: ffff956000fa18b0 (&l->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: lock_list_lru_of_memcg+0x128/0x230 but task is already holding lock: ffff956000fa18b0 (&l->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: rust_helper_spin_lock+0xd/0x20 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(&l->lock); lock(&l->lock); *** DEADLOCK *** May be due to missing lock nesting notation 3 locks held by kswapd0/68: #0: ffffffff90d2e260 (fs_reclaim){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: kswapd+0x597/0x1160 #1: ffff956000fa18b0 (&l->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: rust_helper_spin_lock+0xd/0x20 #2: ffffffff90cf3680 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: lock_list_lru_of_memcg+0x2d/0x230 To fix this, remove the spin_lock() call from rust_shrink_free_page(). | |
| Title | rust_binder: remove spin_lock() in rust_shrink_free_page() | |
| First Time appeared |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| CPEs | cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:* | |
| Vendors & Products |
Linux
Linux linux Kernel |
|
| References |
|
Status: PUBLISHED
Assigner: Linux
Published:
Updated: 2026-02-09T08:36:05.247Z
Reserved: 2026-01-31T11:36:51.185Z
Link: CVE-2025-71181
No data.
Status : Analyzed
Published: 2026-01-31T12:16:03.353
Modified: 2026-03-25T19:43:46.447
Link: CVE-2025-71181
OpenCVE Enrichment
No data.
Weaknesses