CVE-2025-21664: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: dm thin: make get_first_thin use rcu-safe list first function The documentation ...

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: dm thin: make get_first_thin use rcu-safe list first function The documentation in rculist.h explains the absence of list_empty_rcu() and cautions programmers against relying on a list_empty() -> list_first() sequence in RCU safe code. This is because each of these functions performs its own READ_ONCE() of the list head. This can lead to a situation where the list_empty() sees a valid list entry, but the subsequent list_first() sees a different view of list head state after a modification. In the case of dm-thin, this author had a production box crash from a GP fault in the process_deferred_bios path. This function saw a valid list head in get_first_thin() but when it subsequently dereferenced that and turned it into a thin_c, it got the inside of the struct pool, since the list was now empty and referring to itself. The kernel on which this occurred printed both a warning about a refcount_t being saturated, and a UBSAN error for an out-of-bounds cpuid access in the queued spinlock, prior to the fault itself. When the resulting kdump was examined, it was possible to see another thread patiently waiting in thin_dtr's synchronize_rcu. The thin_dtr call managed to pull the thin_c out of the active thins list (and have it be the last entry in the active_thins list) at just the wrong moment which lead to this crash. Fortunately, the fix here is straight forward. Switch get_first_thin() function to use list_first_or_null_rcu() which performs just a single READ_ONCE() and returns NULL if the list is already empty. This was run against the devicemapper test suite's thin-provisioning suites for delete and suspend and no regressions were observed.

Metrics

CVSS 3.1

5.5/10

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

EPSS Probability

0.21%

11.2th percentile

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days. Learn more

Affected Software

Vendor	Product	Versions	Update
Linux	Linux Kernel	>= 3.15.1, < 5.4.290	—
Linux	Linux Kernel	>= 5.5, < 5.10.234	—
Linux	Linux Kernel	>= 5.11, < 5.15.177	—
Linux	Linux Kernel	>= 5.16, < 6.1.125	—
Linux	Linux Kernel	>= 6.2, < 6.6.72	—
Linux	Linux Kernel	>= 6.7, < 6.12.10	—
Linux	Linux Kernel	3.15	—
Linux	Linux Kernel	6.13	Rc1

References

Timeline

Published: Jan 21, 2025
Last Modified: Jun 17, 2026
Status: Modified

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2025-21664?

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: dm thin: make get_first_thin use rcu-safe list first function The documentation in rculist.h explains the absence of list_empty_rcu() and cautions programmers against relying on a list_empty() -> list_first() sequence in RCU safe code. This is because each of these functions performs its own READ_ONCE() of the list head. This can lead to a situation where the list_empty() sees a valid list entry, but the subsequent list_first() sees a different view of list head state after a modification. In the case of dm-thin, this author had a production box crash from a GP fault in the process_deferred_bios path. This function saw a valid list head in get_first_thin() but when it subsequently dereferenced that and turned it into a thin_c, it got the inside of the struct pool, since the list was now empty and referring to itself. The kernel on which this occurred printed both a warning about a refcount_t being saturated, and a UBSAN error for an out-of-bounds cpuid access in the queued spinlock, prior to the fault itself. When the resulting kdump was examined, it was possible to see another thread patiently waiting in thin_dtr's synchronize_rcu. The thin_dtr call managed to pull the thin_c out of the active thins list (and have it be the last entry in the active_thins list) at just the wrong moment which lead to this crash. Fortunately, the fix here is straight forward. Switch get_first_thin() function to use list_first_or_null_rcu() which performs just a single READ_ONCE() and returns NULL if the list is already empty. This was run against the devicemapper test suite's thin-provisioning suites for delete and suspend and no regressions were observed.

How severe is CVE-2025-21664?

CVE-2025-21664 has a CVSS score of 5.5/10 (MEDIUM severity). The EPSS model estimates a 0.21% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.

How do I fix CVE-2025-21664?

Check the vendor references and advisories linked above for patched versions and mitigation guidance. You can also run a Strix scan to test if your systems are affected.