Skip to content

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been...

Moderate severity Unreviewed Published Apr 1, 2025 to the GitHub Advisory Database • Updated Apr 11, 2025

Package

No package listedSuggest a package

Affected versions

Unknown

Patched versions

Unknown

Description

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

bus: mhi: host: pci_generic: Use pci_try_reset_function() to avoid deadlock

There are multiple places from where the recovery work gets scheduled
asynchronously. Also, there are multiple places where the caller waits
synchronously for the recovery to be completed. One such place is during
the PM shutdown() callback.

If the device is not alive during recovery_work, it will try to reset the
device using pci_reset_function(). This function internally will take the
device_lock() first before resetting the device. By this time, if the lock
has already been acquired, then recovery_work will get stalled while
waiting for the lock. And if the lock was already acquired by the caller
which waits for the recovery_work to be completed, it will lead to
deadlock.

This is what happened on the X1E80100 CRD device when the device died
before shutdown() callback. Driver core calls the driver's shutdown()
callback while holding the device_lock() leading to deadlock.

And this deadlock scenario can occur on other paths as well, like during
the PM suspend() callback, where the driver core would hold the
device_lock() before calling driver's suspend() callback. And if the
recovery_work was already started, it could lead to deadlock. This is also
observed on the X1E80100 CRD.

So to fix both issues, use pci_try_reset_function() in recovery_work. This
function first checks for the availability of the device_lock() before
trying to reset the device. If the lock is available, it will acquire it
and reset the device. Otherwise, it will return -EAGAIN. If that happens,
recovery_work will fail with the error message "Recovery failed" as not
much could be done.

References

Published by the National Vulnerability Database Apr 1, 2025
Published to the GitHub Advisory Database Apr 1, 2025
Last updated Apr 11, 2025

Severity

Moderate

CVSS overall score

This score calculates overall vulnerability severity from 0 to 10 and is based on the Common Vulnerability Scoring System (CVSS).
/ 10

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector
Local
Attack complexity
Low
Privileges required
Low
User interaction
None
Scope
Unchanged
Confidentiality
None
Integrity
None
Availability
High

CVSS v3 base metrics

Attack vector: More severe the more the remote (logically and physically) an attacker can be in order to exploit the vulnerability.
Attack complexity: More severe for the least complex attacks.
Privileges required: More severe if no privileges are required.
User interaction: More severe when no user interaction is required.
Scope: More severe when a scope change occurs, e.g. one vulnerable component impacts resources in components beyond its security scope.
Confidentiality: More severe when loss of data confidentiality is highest, measuring the level of data access available to an unauthorized user.
Integrity: More severe when loss of data integrity is the highest, measuring the consequence of data modification possible by an unauthorized user.
Availability: More severe when the loss of impacted component availability is highest.
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

EPSS score

Exploit Prediction Scoring System (EPSS)

This score estimates the probability of this vulnerability being exploited within the next 30 days. Data provided by FIRST.
(4th percentile)

Weaknesses

CVE ID

CVE-2025-21951

GHSA ID

GHSA-pf4f-8wpm-5vh2

Source code

No known source code

Dependabot alerts are not supported on this advisory because it does not have a package from a supported ecosystem with an affected and fixed version.

Learn more about GitHub language support

Loading Checking history
See something to contribute? Suggest improvements for this vulnerability.