CVE-2024-42096

x86: stop playing stack games in profile_pc()

MEDIUM
5.5
CVSS Score
Published: July 29, 2024 at 05:39 PM UTC
Updated: October 15, 2026 at 01:18 AM UTC
5 products affected across 2 vendorsLinux KernelSIMATIC S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 Pn /dp MFP FirmwareSiplus S7-1500 CPU 1518-4 Pn /dp MFP Firmware

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: x86: stop playing stack games in profile_pc() The 'profile_pc()' function is used for timer-based profiling, which isn't really all that relevant any more to begin with, but it also ends up making assumptions based on the stack layout that aren't necessarily valid. Basically, the code tries to account the time spent in spinlocks to the caller rather than the spinlock, and while I support that as a concept, it's not worth the code complexity or the KASAN warnings when no serious profiling is done using timers anyway these days. And the code really does depend on stack layout that is only true in the simplest of cases. We've lost the comment at some point (I think when the 32-bit and 64-bit code was unified), but it used to say: Assume the lock function has either no stack frame or a copy of eflags from PUSHF. which explains why it just blindly loads a word or two straight off the stack pointer and then takes a minimal look at the values to just check if they might be eflags or the return pc: Eflags always has bits 22 and up cleared unlike kernel addresses but that basic stack layout assumption assumes that there isn't any lock debugging etc going on that would complicate the code and cause a stack frame. It causes KASAN unhappiness reported for years by syzkaller [1] and others [2]. With no real practical reason for this any more, just remove the code. Just for historical interest, here's some background commits relating to this code from 2006: 0cb91a229364 ("i386: Account spinlocks to the caller during profiling for !FP kernels") 31679f38d886 ("Simplify profile_pc on x86-64") and a code unification from 2009: ef4512882dbe ("x86: time_32/64.c unify profile_pc") but the basics of this thing actually goes back to before the git tree.

Affected

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

v < 4.19.3174.20 ≤ v < 5.4.2795.11 ≤ v < 5.15.1625.16 ≤ v < 6.1.975.5 ≤ v < 5.10.2216.2 ≤ v < 6.6.376.7 ≤ v < 6.9.81da177e4c3f41524e886b7f1b8a0c1fc7321cac22.6.126.106.10 rc16.10 rc26.10 rc36.10 rc46.10 rc5
Vendor states this is fixed in 093d9603b60093a9aaae942db56107f6432a5dca (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 161cef818545ecf980f0e2ebaf8ba7326ce53c2b (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 16222beb9f8e5ceb0beeb5cbe54bef16df501a92 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 27c3be840911b15a3f24ed623f86153c825b6b29 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 2d07fea561d64357fb7b3f3751e653bf20306d77 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 49c09ca35a5f521d7fa18caf62fdf378f15e8aa4 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 65ebdde16e7f5da99dbf8a548fb635837d78384e (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in a3b65c8cbc139bfce9541bc81c1bb766e5ba3f68 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 2.6.12 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 4.19.317 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.10.221 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.15.162 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 5.4.279 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.1.97 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.10 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.6.37 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.9.8 (unaffected)
V3.1.0 ≤ v < V3.1.53.1.0
Affected range stops below V3.1.5, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
V3.1.0 ≤ v < V3.1.53.1.0
Affected range stops below V3.1.5, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement
V3.1.0 ≤ v < V3.1.53.1.0
Affected range stops below V3.1.5, so it looks safe — our inference, not a vendor statement

References (11)

Patch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/093d9603b60093a9aaae942db56107f6432a5dca
Patch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/161cef818545ecf980f0e2ebaf8ba7326ce53c2b
Patch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/16222beb9f8e5ceb0beeb5cbe54bef16df501a92
Patch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/27c3be840911b15a3f24ed623f86153c825b6b29
Patch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/2d07fea561d64357fb7b3f3751e653bf20306d77
Patch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/49c09ca35a5f521d7fa18caf62fdf378f15e8aa4
Patch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/65ebdde16e7f5da99dbf8a548fb635837d78384e
Patch
Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67
https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/a3b65c8cbc139bfce9541bc81c1bb766e5ba3f68

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
CWE-908

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