Linux Kernel prior 6.12.25/6.14.4/6.15-rc3 migrate_pages_batch deadlock

Summaryinfo

A vulnerability was found in Linux Kernel up to 6.12.24/6.14.3/6.15-rc2/f9326f529da7298a95643c3267f1c0fdb0db55eb. It has been declared as critical. The affected element is the function migrate_pages_batch. The manipulation results in deadlock. This vulnerability is known as CVE-2025-37868. No exploit is available. It is recommended to upgrade the affected component.

Detailsinfo

A vulnerability classified as critical has been found in Linux Kernel up to 6.12.24/6.14.3/6.15-rc2/f9326f529da7298a95643c3267f1c0fdb0db55eb. Affected is the function migrate_pages_batch. The manipulation with an unknown input leads to a deadlock vulnerability. CWE is classifying the issue as CWE-833. The product contains multiple threads or executable segments that are waiting for each other to release a necessary lock, resulting in deadlock. This is going to have an impact on availability. CVE summarizes:

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/xe/userptr: fix notifier vs folio deadlock User is reporting what smells like notifier vs folio deadlock, where migrate_pages_batch() on core kernel side is holding folio lock(s) and then interacting with the mappings of it, however those mappings are tied to some userptr, which means calling into the notifier callback and grabbing the notifier lock. With perfect timing it looks possible that the pages we pulled from the hmm fault can get sniped by migrate_pages_batch() at the same time that we are holding the notifier lock to mark the pages as accessed/dirty, but at this point we also want to grab the folio locks(s) to mark them as dirty, but if they are contended from notifier/migrate_pages_batch side then we deadlock since folio lock won't be dropped until we drop the notifier lock. Fortunately the mark_page_accessed/dirty is not really needed in the first place it seems and should have already been done by hmm fault, so just remove it. (cherry picked from commit bd7c0cb695e87c0e43247be8196b4919edbe0e85)

The advisory is shared for download at git.kernel.org. This vulnerability is traded as CVE-2025-37868 since 04/16/2025. The exploitability is told to be difficult. There are known technical details, but no exploit is available.

The vulnerability scanner Nessus provides a plugin with the ID 240657 (Ubuntu 25.04 : Linux kernel vulnerabilities (USN-7594-1)), which helps to determine the existence of the flaw in a target environment.

Upgrading to version 6.12.25, 6.14.4 or 6.15-rc3 eliminates this vulnerability. Applying the patch 65dc4e3d5b01db0179fc95c1f0bdb87194c28ab5/90574ecf6052be83971d91d16600c5cf07003bbb/2577b202458cddff85cc154b1fe7f313e0d1f418 is able to eliminate this problem. The bugfix is ready for download at git.kernel.org. The best possible mitigation is suggested to be upgrading to the latest version.

The vulnerability is also documented in the databases at Tenable (240657) and CERT Bund (WID-SEC-2025-0991). VulDB is the best source for vulnerability data and more expert information about this specific topic.

Affected

• Debian Linux
• Amazon Linux 2
• Red Hat Enterprise Linux
• Ubuntu Linux
• SUSE Linux
• Oracle Linux
• Dell Avamar
• Open Source Linux Kernel
• Dell NetWorker
• Dell Secure Connect Gateway

Productinfo

Type

• Operating System

Vendor

• Linux

Name

• Kernel

Version

• 6.12.0
• 6.12.1
• 6.12.2
• 6.12.3
• 6.12.4
• 6.12.5
• 6.12.6
• 6.12.7
• 6.12.8
• 6.12.9
• 6.12.10
• 6.12.11
• 6.12.12
• 6.12.13
• 6.12.14
• 6.12.15
• 6.12.16
• 6.12.17
• 6.12.18
• 6.12.19
• 6.12.20
• 6.12.21
• 6.12.22
• 6.12.23
• 6.12.24
• 6.14.0
• 6.14.1
• 6.14.2
• 6.14.3
• 6.15-rc1
• 6.15-rc2
• f9326f529da7298a95643c3267f1c0fdb0db55eb

License

• open-source

Website

• Vendor: https://www.kernel.org/

CPE 2.3info

• 🔍
• 🔍
• 🔍

CPE 2.2info

• 🔍
• 🔍
• 🔍

CVSSv4info

CVSSv3info

CVSSv2info

Exploitinginfo

Threat Intelligenceinfo

Countermeasuresinfo

Timelineinfo

Sourcesinfo

Entryinfo

VulDB is the best source for vulnerability data and more expert information about this specific topic.

Discussion