CVE-2024-40980
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: drop_monitor: replace spin_lock by raw_spin_lock trace_drop_common() is called with preemption disabled, and it acquires a spin_lock. This is problematic for RT kernels because spin_locks are sleeping locks in this configuration, which causes the following splat: BUG: sleeping function called from invalid context at kernel/locking/spinlock_rt.c:48 in_atomic(): 1, irqs_disabled(): 1, non_block: 0, pid: 449, name: rcuc/47 preempt_count: 1, expected: 0 RCU nest depth: 2, expected: 2 5 locks held by rcuc/47/449: #0: ff1100086ec30a60 ((softirq_ctrl.lock)){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: __local_bh_disable_ip+0x105/0x210 #1: ffffffffb394a280 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: rt_spin_lock+0xbf/0x130 #2: ffffffffb394a280 (rcu_read_lock){....}-{1:2}, at: __local_bh_disable_ip+0x11c/0x210 #3: ffffffffb394a160 (rcu_callback){....}-{0:0}, at: rcu_do_batch+0x360/0xc70 #4: ff1100086ee07520 (&data->lock){+.+.}-{2:2}, at: trace_drop_common.constprop.0+0xb5/0x290 irq event stamp: 139909 hardirqs last enabled at (139908): [<ffffffffb1df2b33>] _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x63/0x80 hardirqs last disabled at (139909): [<ffffffffb19bd03d>] trace_drop_common.constprop.0+0x26d/0x290 softirqs last enabled at (139892): [<ffffffffb07a1083>] __local_bh_enable_ip+0x103/0x170 softirqs last disabled at (139898): [<ffffffffb0909b33>] rcu_cpu_kthread+0x93/0x1f0 Preemption disabled at: [<ffffffffb1de786b>] rt_mutex_slowunlock+0xab/0x2e0 CPU: 47 PID: 449 Comm: rcuc/47 Not tainted 6.9.0-rc2-rt1+ #7 Hardware name: Dell Inc. PowerEdge R650/0Y2G81, BIOS 1.6.5 04/15/2022 Call Trace: <TASK> dump_stack_lvl+0x8c/0xd0 dump_stack+0x14/0x20 __might_resched+0x21e/0x2f0 rt_spin_lock+0x5e/0x130 ? trace_drop_common.constprop.0+0xb5/0x290 ? skb_queue_purge_reason.part.0+0x1bf/0x230 trace_drop_common.constprop.0+0xb5/0x290 ? preempt_count_sub+0x1c/0xd0 ? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x4a/0x80 ? __pfx_trace_drop_common.constprop.0+0x10/0x10 ? rt_mutex_slowunlock+0x26a/0x2e0 ? skb_queue_purge_reason.part.0+0x1bf/0x230 ? __pfx_rt_mutex_slowunlock+0x10/0x10 ? skb_queue_purge_reason.part.0+0x1bf/0x230 trace_kfree_skb_hit+0x15/0x20 trace_kfree_skb+0xe9/0x150 kfree_skb_reason+0x7b/0x110 skb_queue_purge_reason.part.0+0x1bf/0x230 ? __pfx_skb_queue_purge_reason.part.0+0x10/0x10 ? mark_lock.part.0+0x8a/0x520 ... trace_drop_common() also disables interrupts, but this is a minor issue because we could easily replace it with a local_lock. Replace the spin_lock with raw_spin_lock to avoid sleeping in atomic context.
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< 5.4.279>= 5.5, < 5.10.221>= 5.11, < 5.15.162>= 5.16, < 6.1.96>= 6.2, < 6.6.36>= 6.7, < 6.9.7CVSS 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 · scoped5.4.2795.10.2215.15.162
Kernel version 6.1.96 or later (or 5.15.162, 5.10.221, or 5.4.279 depending on your base version branch)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 5.4.279 or later if the base version is < 5.4.279
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 5.10.221 or later if the base version is >= 5.5 and < 5.10.221
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 5.15.162 or later if the base version is >= 5.11 and < 5.15.162
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 6.1.96 or later if the base version is >= 5.16 and < 6.1.96
- Alternatively, apply the vendor patch commit 07ea878684dfb78a9d4f564c39d07e855a9e242e which replaces spin_lock with raw_spin_lock in trace_drop_common()
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-2024-40980 — 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-2024-40980 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