CVE-2024-36003
Official description Straight from the sourceThe vendor's or NVD's own wording, published unedited. Authoritative, but often terse — it says what broke, rarely what to do.
NVD · uneditedIn the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ice: fix LAG and VF lock dependency in ice_reset_vf() 9f74a3dfcf83 ("ice: Fix VF Reset paths when interface in a failed over aggregate"), the ice driver has acquired the LAG mutex in ice_reset_vf(). The commit placed this lock acquisition just prior to the acquisition of the VF configuration lock. If ice_reset_vf() acquires the configuration lock via the ICE_VF_RESET_LOCK flag, this could deadlock with ice_vc_cfg_qs_msg() because it always acquires the locks in the order of the VF configuration lock and then the LAG mutex. Lockdep reports this violation almost immediately on creating and then removing 2 VF: ====================================================== WARNING: possible circular locking dependency detected 6.8.0-rc6 #54 Tainted: G W O ------------------------------------------------------ kworker/60:3/6771 is trying to acquire lock: ff40d43e099380a0 (&vf->cfg_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] but task is already holding lock: ff40d43ea1961210 (&pf->lag_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: ice_reset_vf+0xb7/0x4d0 [ice] which lock already depends on the new lock. the existing dependency chain (in reverse order) is: -> #1 (&pf->lag_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}: __lock_acquire+0x4f8/0xb40 lock_acquire+0xd4/0x2d0 __mutex_lock+0x9b/0xbf0 ice_vc_cfg_qs_msg+0x45/0x690 [ice] ice_vc_process_vf_msg+0x4f5/0x870 [ice] __ice_clean_ctrlq+0x2b5/0x600 [ice] ice_service_task+0x2c9/0x480 [ice] process_one_work+0x1e9/0x4d0 worker_thread+0x1e1/0x3d0 kthread+0x104/0x140 ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30 -> #0 (&vf->cfg_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}: check_prev_add+0xe2/0xc50 validate_chain+0x558/0x800 __lock_acquire+0x4f8/0xb40 lock_acquire+0xd4/0x2d0 __mutex_lock+0x9b/0xbf0 ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ice_process_vflr_event+0x98/0xd0 [ice] ice_service_task+0x1cc/0x480 [ice] process_one_work+0x1e9/0x4d0 worker_thread+0x1e1/0x3d0 kthread+0x104/0x140 ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 CPU1 ---- ---- lock(&pf->lag_mutex); lock(&vf->cfg_lock); lock(&pf->lag_mutex); lock(&vf->cfg_lock); *** DEADLOCK *** 4 locks held by kworker/60:3/6771: #0: ff40d43e05428b38 ((wq_completion)ice){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x176/0x4d0 #1: ff50d06e05197e58 ((work_completion)(&pf->serv_task)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x176/0x4d0 #2: ff40d43ea1960e50 (&pf->vfs.table_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: ice_process_vflr_event+0x48/0xd0 [ice] #3: ff40d43ea1961210 (&pf->lag_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: ice_reset_vf+0xb7/0x4d0 [ice] stack backtrace: CPU: 60 PID: 6771 Comm: kworker/60:3 Tainted: G W O 6.8.0-rc6 #54 Hardware name: Workqueue: ice ice_service_task [ice] Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x4a/0x80 check_noncircular+0x12d/0x150 check_prev_add+0xe2/0xc50 ? save_trace+0x59/0x230 ? add_chain_cache+0x109/0x450 validate_chain+0x558/0x800 __lock_acquire+0x4f8/0xb40 ? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0x7d/0x100 lock_acquire+0xd4/0x2d0 ? ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ? lock_is_held_type+0xc7/0x120 __mutex_lock+0x9b/0xbf0 ? ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ? ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ? rcu_is_watching+0x11/0x50 ? ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ice_reset_vf+0x22f/0x4d0 [ice] ? process_one_work+0x176/0x4d0 ice_process_vflr_event+0x98/0xd0 [ice] ice_service_task+0x1cc/0x480 [ice] process_one_work+0x1e9/0x4d0 worker_thread+0x1e1/0x3d0 ? __pfx_worker_thread+0x10/0x10 kthread+0x104/0x140 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork+0x31/0x50 ? __pfx_kthread+0x10/0x10 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1b/0x30 </TASK> To avoid deadlock, we must acquire the LAG ---truncated---
Technical summary Written by usOur analysis, written from the advisory, the CVSS vector and the affected-version data. It adds context the advisory leaves out, and never invents facts that are not in the source.
dbcve analysisShared resources are accessed without correct locking, so concurrent operations interleave into inconsistent — and sometimes exploitable — states, or deadlock the service outright. These bugs are subtle and timing-dependent. The fix is correct, consistent locking or atomic operations around every shared resource.
General guidance for the improper locking class — the official description and references above are authoritative for this specific CVE. Want a bespoke review and a reviewed fix? Ask our team →
Affected products & versions What the vendor confirmedThe version ranges the vendor confirmed as vulnerable. If your version sits inside a range here, treat yourself as exposed until you have upgraded.
NVD · CPE data>= 6.6.5, < 6.6.30>= 6.7, < 6.8.9= 6.9CVSS breakdown How the score is builtThe industry scoring standard. It rates how the flaw is reached, what it takes to exploit, and what an attacker gains — the score is derived from those, not the other way round.
From the vector- Attack vector
- Local
- Complexity
- Low
- Privileges
- Low
- User interaction
- None
- Scope
- Unchanged
- Confidentiality
- None
- Integrity
- None
- Availability
- High
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
Remediation Closing itWhat it takes to close this. Where a vendor fix exists we point at it; where none exists we say so plainly, and can build one. Effort estimates are scoped from the advisory, not from your codebase.
dbcve · scoped6.6.306.8.9
Upgrade to Linux kernel 6.6.30, 6.8.9, or 6.10+ (the fixed releases)
- Identify the current running kernel version using `uname -r`
- Check if the current version is within an affected range: < 6.6.30, 6.7.x - 6.8.8, or 6.9.x
- If affected, schedule a maintenance window for kernel upgrade
- Update the system to a kernel version >= 6.6.30, >= 6.8.9, or >= 6.10 (for 6.9 users)
- Reboot the system to load the fixed kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version and confirming the ice driver loads without lockdep warnings
Generated from the published advisory — verify against the referenced sources before acting.
Scan for this in your stack
Free · runs locallyCheck whether your project pulls in CVE-2024-36003 — or any other known-vulnerable package — straight from your lock files. Free and open source; it runs locally and uploads nothing.
References Go to the primary sourcePrimary sources — vendor advisories, patches and trackers. Where our summary and a reference disagree, the reference wins.
Primary sourcesPractitioner notes
ContributedPeer-ranked notes from engineers who’ve handled CVE-2024-36003 in production — separate from our analysis above.
The advisory tells you what broke. It rarely tells you what actually worked. If you’ve dealt with this one, that detail is what the next engineer is searching for.
- The version that genuinely resolved it — not the one the vendor claimed
- A config change or rule that shut the vector down
- A gotcha in the upgrade path that cost you an afternoon
No notes yet
Be the first to add a field note for this CVE — a mitigation you’ve verified, a version caveat, or a link to a working fix. Sign in above to contribute.
A place for practitioners to share what actually worked: a mitigation you’ve tested, a configuration change, a version- or environment-specific caveat, or a link to a verified patch. The most useful notes rise to the top as peers upvote them, so the signal stays high.
- Verified mitigations, workarounds, and config changes
- Version or environment caveats, and links to real fixes
- No weaponised exploit code, or anything meant to cause harm
- No spam, self-promotion, credentials, or personal data