发布时间: 2024年6月7日
修改时间: 2024年10月31日
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/hugetlb: fix missing hugetlb_lock for resv uncharge There is a recent report on UFFDIO_COPY over hugetlb: https://lore.kernel.org/all/000000000000ee06de0616177560@google.com/ 350: lockdep_assert_held(&hugetlb_lock); Should be an issue in hugetlb but triggered in an userfault context, where it goes into the unlikely path where two threads modifying the resv map together. Mike has a fix in that path for resv uncharge but it looks like the locking criteria was overlooked: hugetlb_cgroup_uncharge_folio_rsvd() will update the cgroup pointer, so it requires to be called with the lock held.
| NVD | openEuler | |
|---|---|---|
| Confidentiality | None | |
| Attack Vector | Local | |
| CVSS评分 | N/A | 5.5 |
| Attack Complexity | Low | |
| Privileges Required | Low | |
| Scope | Unchanged | |
| Integrity | None | |
| User Interaction | None | |
| Availability | High |
| 公告名 | 概要 | 发布时间 |
|---|---|---|
| KylinSec-SA-2024-2505 | In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: mm/hugetlb: fix missing hugetlb_lock for resv uncharge There is a recent report on UFFDIO_COPY over hugetlb: https://lore.kernel.org/all/000000000000ee06de0616177560@google.com/ 350: lockdep_assert_held(&hugetlb_lock); Should be an issue in hugetlb but triggered in an userfault context, where it goes into the unlikely path where two threads modifying the resv map together. Mike has a fix in that path for resv uncharge but it looks like the locking criteria was overlooked: hugetlb_cgroup_uncharge_folio_rsvd() will update the cgroup pointer, so it requires to be called with the lock held. | 2024年5月31日 |
| KylinSec-SA-2024-4955 | kernel security update | 2025年2月28日 |
| 产品 | 包 | 状态 |
|---|---|---|
| KY3.5.2 | kernel | Fixed |
