CVE-2025-38338

HIGHCVSS 7.8/10EPSS 0.15%

Last modified

CVE-2025-38338 is a high-severity vulnerability rated 7.8/10 on the CVSS scale. In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fs/nfs/read: fix double-unlock bug in nfs_return_empty_folio() Sometimes, when a file was read while it was being truncated by another NFS client, the kernel could deadlock because folio_unlock() was called twice, and the second call would XOR back the `PG_locked` flag. Most of the time (depending on the timing of the truncation), nobody notices the problem because folio_unlock() gets called three times, which flips `PG_locked` back off: 1. vfs_read, nfs_read_folio, ... EPSS estimates a 0.15% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days.

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fs/nfs/read: fix double-unlock bug in nfs_return_empty_folio() Sometimes, when a file was read while it was being truncated by another NFS client, the kernel could deadlock because folio_unlock() was called twice, and the second call would XOR back the `PG_locked` flag. Most of the time (depending on the timing of the truncation), nobody notices the problem because folio_unlock() gets called three times, which flips `PG_locked` back off: 1. vfs_read, nfs_read_folio, ... nfs_read_add_folio, nfs_return_empty_folio 2. vfs_read, nfs_read_folio, ... netfs_read_collection, netfs_unlock_abandoned_read_pages 3. vfs_read, ... nfs_do_read_folio, nfs_read_add_folio, nfs_return_empty_folio The problem is that nfs_read_add_folio() is not supposed to unlock the folio if fscache is enabled, and a nfs_netfs_folio_unlock() check is missing in nfs_return_empty_folio(). Rarely this leads to a warning in netfs_read_collection(): ------------[ cut here ]------------ R=0000031c: folio 10 is not locked WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 29 at fs/netfs/read_collect.c:133 netfs_read_collection+0x7c0/0xf00 [...] Workqueue: events_unbound netfs_read_collection_worker RIP: 0010:netfs_read_collection+0x7c0/0xf00 [...] Call Trace: <TASK> netfs_read_collection_worker+0x67/0x80 process_one_work+0x12e/0x2c0 worker_thread+0x295/0x3a0 Most of the time, however, processes just get stuck forever in folio_wait_bit_common(), waiting for `PG_locked` to disappear, which never happens because nobody is really holding the folio lock.

Metrics

CVSS 3.1
7.8/10

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

EPSS Probability
0.15%

4.8th percentile

Probability of exploitation in the next 30 days. Learn more

Weakness Enumeration

Affected Software

VendorProductVersions
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 6.4, < 6.6.95
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 6.7, < 6.12.35
LinuxLinux Kernel>= 6.13, < 6.15.4

References

Timeline

Published
Last Modified
Status
Analyzed

Frequently Asked Questions

What is CVE-2025-38338?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: fs/nfs/read: fix double-unlock bug in nfs_return_empty_folio() Sometimes, when a file was read while it was being truncated by another NFS client, the kernel could deadlock because folio_unlock() was called twice, and the second call would XOR back the `PG_locked` flag. Most of the time (depending on the timing of the truncation), nobody notices the problem because folio_unlock() gets called three times, which flips `PG_locked` back off: 1. vfs_read, nfs_read_folio, ... nfs_read_add_folio, nfs_return_empty_folio 2. vfs_read, nfs_read_folio, ... netfs_read_collection, netfs_unlock_abandoned_read_pages 3. vfs_read, ... nfs_do_read_folio, nfs_read_add_folio, nfs_return_empty_folio The problem is that nfs_read_add_folio() is not supposed to unlock the folio if fscache is enabled, and a nfs_netfs_folio_unlock() check is missing in nfs_return_empty_folio(). Rarely this leads to a warning in netfs_read_collection(): ------------[ cut here ]------------ R=0000031c: folio 10 is not locked WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 29 at fs/netfs/read_collect.c:133 netfs_read_collection+0x7c0/0xf00 [...] Workqueue: events_unbound netfs_read_collection_worker RIP: 0010:netfs_read_collection+0x7c0/0xf00 [...] Call Trace: <TASK> netfs_read_collection_worker+0x67/0x80 process_one_work+0x12e/0x2c0 worker_thread+0x295/0x3a0 Most of the time, however, processes just get stuck forever in folio_wait_bit_common(), waiting for `PG_locked` to disappear, which never happens because nobody is really holding the folio lock.
How severe is CVE-2025-38338?
CVE-2025-38338 has a CVSS score of 7.8/10 (HIGH severity). The EPSS model estimates a 0.15% probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.
How do I fix CVE-2025-38338?
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.

Are you affected by CVE-2025-38338?

Run a free Strix scan to check your systems for this vulnerability.

Scan your code now

Source: NVD / NIST