CVE-2025-37747

Published May 1, 2025

Last updated 2 days ago

Overview

Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf: Fix hang while freeing sigtrap event Perf can hang while freeing a sigtrap event if a related deferred signal hadn't managed to be sent before the file got closed: perf_event_overflow() task_work_add(perf_pending_task) fput() task_work_add(____fput()) task_work_run() ____fput() perf_release() perf_event_release_kernel() _free_event() perf_pending_task_sync() task_work_cancel() -> FAILED rcuwait_wait_event() Once task_work_run() is running, the list of pending callbacks is removed from the task_struct and from this point on task_work_cancel() can't remove any pending and not yet started work items, hence the task_work_cancel() failure and the hang on rcuwait_wait_event(). Task work could be changed to remove one work at a time, so a work running on the current task can always cancel a pending one, however the wait / wake design is still subject to inverted dependencies when remote targets are involved, as pictured by Oleg: T1 T2 fd = perf_event_open(pid => T2->pid); fd = perf_event_open(pid => T1->pid); close(fd) close(fd) <IRQ> <IRQ> perf_event_overflow() perf_event_overflow() task_work_add(perf_pending_task) task_work_add(perf_pending_task) </IRQ> </IRQ> fput() fput() task_work_add(____fput()) task_work_add(____fput()) task_work_run() task_work_run() ____fput() ____fput() perf_release() perf_release() perf_event_release_kernel() perf_event_release_kernel() _free_event() _free_event() perf_pending_task_sync() perf_pending_task_sync() rcuwait_wait_event() rcuwait_wait_event() Therefore the only option left is to acquire the event reference count upon queueing the perf task work and release it from the task work, just like it was done before 3a5465418f5f ("perf: Fix event leak upon exec and file release") but without the leaks it fixed. Some adjustments are necessary to make it work: * A child event might dereference its parent upon freeing. Care must be taken to release the parent last. * Some places assuming the event doesn't have any reference held and therefore can be freed right away must instead put the reference and let the reference counting to its job.
Source
416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
NVD status
Modified
Products
linux_kernel

Risk scores

CVSS 3.1

Type
Primary
Base score
5.5
Impact score
3.6
Exploitability score
1.8
Vector string
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Severity
MEDIUM

Weaknesses

nvd@nist.gov
NVD-CWE-noinfo

Social media

Hype score
Not currently trending

Configurations

  1. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: cgroup: Avoid iteration of dying tasks with zero refcount The commit 260fbcb92bbea ("cgroup: Move dying_tasks cleanup from cgroup_task_release() to cgroup_task_free()") extended the lifetime of tasks on the dying_tasks list. The iterators have provision to go through dying_tasks because of dying threadgroup leaders or explicit CSS_TASK_ITER_WITH_DEAD, however, it was expected that such tasks can obtain a new reference (that is possible before cgroup_task_release()/put_task_struct_rcu_user()). The tasks after cgroup_task_release() and before cgroup_task_free() are subject to race when they may or may not have ->usage count > 0. The race window is between css_task_iter_next() invocations when css_set_lock is released and we may arrive at a new ->task_pos. The iterator should not attempt to resurrect tasks whose ->usage count dropped to zero. (When that happens, __put_task_struct_rcu_cb() is already imminent and the returned task_struct would could be used after free.) As for the fix, we cannot simply check the signal->live count of a task on the dying list because that won't distinguish regular zombies waiting to be reaped from RCU remnant tasks that are going to be free'd. Therefore add an extra check to rule out ->usage==0 tasks from any iteration. The repeat: loop in css_task_iter_advance() doesn't consider ->usage count, so add a new loop to css_task_iter_next() to skip de-used tasks on the dying_list. Rough illustration of the possible race R (reader of cgroup.procs) T (thread) L (group leader) --------------------------------- -------------------------------- -------------------------------- L exits, signal->live > 0 cgroup_task_dead(L) css_set_skip_task_iters() // skips only cset->tasks list_add_tail(&L->cg_list, &cset->dying_tasks) css_task_iter_next() take css_set_lock css_task_iter_advance() leader && signal->live != 0 => it->task_pos = &L->cg_list release css_set_lock T exits --signal->live == 0 cgroup_task_dead(T) // css_set_lock release_task(T) cgroup_task_release(T) release_task(L) // zap_leader cgroup_task_release(L) put_task_struct_rcu_user(L) ...RCU... put_task_struct(L) L->usage = 0 /* L still on dying_tasks */ ...RCU... __put_task_struct(L) css_task_iter_next() // another iteration take css_set_lock it->task_pos = &L->cg_list get_task_struct(L) => addition on 0 drop css_set_lock cgroup_task_free(L) css_set_skip_task_iters() // dying skip comes too late free_task(L) cgroup_procs_show() task_pid_vnr(L)•CVE-2026-98163