CVE-2025-39905

net: phylink: add lock for serializing concurrent pl->phydev writes with resolver

HIGH
7
CVSS Score
Published: October 1, 2025 at 07:44 AM UTC
Updated: October 19, 2026 at 09:10 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
HIGH7
Exploit prediction
EPSS 0.1%
SSVC
No known exploit

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: phylink: add lock for serializing concurrent pl->phydev writes with resolver Currently phylink_resolve() protects itself against concurrent phylink_bringup_phy() or phylink_disconnect_phy() calls which modify pl->phydev by relying on pl->state_mutex. The problem is that in phylink_resolve(), pl->state_mutex is in a lock inversion state with pl->phydev->lock. So pl->phydev->lock needs to be acquired prior to pl->state_mutex. But that requires dereferencing pl->phydev in the first place, and without pl->state_mutex, that is racy. Hence the reason for the extra lock. Currently it is redundant, but it will serve a functional purpose once mutex_lock(&phy->lock) will be moved outside of the mutex_lock(&pl->state_mutex) section. Another alternative considered would have been to let phylink_resolve() acquire the rtnl_mutex, which is also held when phylink_bringup_phy() and phylink_disconnect_phy() are called. But since phylink_disconnect_phy() runs under rtnl_lock(), it would deadlock with phylink_resolve() when calling flush_work(&pl->resolve). Additionally, it would have been undesirable because it would have unnecessarily blocked many other call paths as well in the entire kernel, so the smaller-scoped lock was preferred.

Affected

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

v < 6.16.85fd0f1a02e750e2db4038dee60edea669ce5aab16.146.176.17 rc16.17 rc26.17 rc36.17 rc46.17 rc5
Vendor states this is fixed in 0ba5b2f2c381dbec9ed9e4ab3ae5d3e667de0dc3 (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 56fe63b05ec84ae6674269d78397cec43a7a295a (fixed)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.14 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.16.8 (unaffected)
Vendor states this is fixed in 6.17 (unaffected)

Remediation

No guide yet

No remediation guidance has been written for this CVE yet. What the record does show:

SSVC — Action Prioritization

SSVCNo known exploitNot automatableTotal impact

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

CVSS

7HIGHCISA-ADP
Attack Vector
LOCAL
Complexity
HIGH
Privileges
LOW
User Interaction
NONE
Scope
UNCHANGED
Confidentiality
HIGH
Integrity
HIGH
Availability
HIGH
Vector?

Quick Info

StatusMODIFIED
CWE
CWE-362

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