CVE-2024-39483

KVM: SVM: WARN on vNMI + NMI window iff NMIs are outright masked

MEDIUM
5.5
CVSS Score
Published: July 5, 2024 at 06:55 AM UTC
Updated: August 5, 2026 at 12:04 PM UTC
1 product affected across 1 vendorLinux Kernel

Using Linux by Linux?

Get instant alerts when new vulnerabilities affect Linux - before attackers find them.

Real-time alertsTrack your software stackFree plan available
Severity
MEDIUM5.5
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.2%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: KVM: SVM: WARN on vNMI + NMI window iff NMIs are outright masked When requesting an NMI window, WARN on vNMI support being enabled if and only if NMIs are actually masked, i.e. if the vCPU is already handling an NMI. KVM's ABI for NMIs that arrive simultanesouly (from KVM's point of view) is to inject one NMI and pend the other. When using vNMI, KVM pends the second NMI simply by setting V_NMI_PENDING, and lets the CPU do the rest (hardware automatically sets V_NMI_BLOCKING when an NMI is injected). However, if KVM can't immediately inject an NMI, e.g. because the vCPU is in an STI shadow or is running with GIF=0, then KVM will request an NMI window and trigger the WARN (but still function correctly). Whether or not the GIF=0 case makes sense is debatable, as the intent of KVM's behavior is to provide functionality that is as close to real hardware as possible. E.g. if two NMIs are sent in quick succession, the probability of both NMIs arriving in an STI shadow is infinitesimally low on real hardware, but significantly larger in a virtual environment, e.g. if the vCPU is preempted in the STI shadow. For GIF=0, the argument isn't as clear cut, because the window where two NMIs can collide is much larger in bare metal (though still small). That said, KVM should not have divergent behavior for the GIF=0 case based on whether or not vNMI support is enabled. And KVM has allowed simultaneous NMIs with GIF=0 for over a decade, since commit 7460fb4a3400 ("KVM: Fix simultaneous NMIs"). I.e. KVM's GIF=0 handling shouldn't be modified without a *really* good reason to do so, and if KVM's behavior were to be modified, it should be done irrespective of vNMI support.

Affected

Our own answer: ranges merged, affected separated from platform-only, with confidence and review flags.

v < 6.46.4 ≤ v < 6.106.4 ≤ v < 6.6.346.4 ≤ v < 6.9.56.6 ≤ v < 6.6.346.9 ≤ v < 6.9.56.10.0 rc16.10.0 rc2fa4c027a7956f5e07697bfcb580d25eeb8471257
Vendor states this is fixed in 1d87cf2eba46deaff6142366127f2323de9f84d1 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in b4bd556467477420ee3a91fbcba73c579669edc6 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in f79edaf7370986d73d204b36c50cc563a4c0f356 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.10 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.4 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.6.34 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.9.5 (unaffected)

References (3)

Mailing ListPatch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/1d87cf2eba46deaff6142366127f2323de9f84d1
Mailing ListPatch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/b4bd556467477420ee3a91fbcba73c579669edc6
Mailing ListPatch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/f79edaf7370986d73d204b36c50cc563a4c0f356

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitNot automatablePartial impact

SSVC signals action urgency (what to patch first), separate from CVSS which measures severity.

CVSS

Attack Vector
LOCAL
Complexity
LOW
Privileges
LOW
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
NONE
Integrity
NONE
Availability
HIGH
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusMODIFIED
CWE
NVD-CWE-noinfo

Get alerted

Stop reading CVE feeds looking for your own stack

Track the products you run and VulnTracker tells you when a new CVE affects them — with what is known about fixing it, and nothing about the rest.

Free plan, no card