Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2024-42245
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: Revert "sched/fair: Make sure to try to detach at least one movable task" This reverts commit b0defa7ae03ecf91b8bfd10ede430cff12fcbd06. b0defa7ae03ec changed the load balancing logic to ignore env.max_loop if all tasks examined to that point were pinned. The goal of the patch was to make it more likely to be able to detach a task buried in a long list of pinned tasks. However, this has the unfortunate side effect of creating an O(n) iteration in detach_tasks(), as we now must fully iterate every task on a cpu if all or most are pinned. Since this load balance code is done with rq lock held, and often in softirq context, it is very easy to trigger hard lockups. We observed such hard lockups with a user who affined O(10k) threads to a single cpu. When I discussed this with Vincent he initially suggested that we keep the limit on the number of tasks to detach, but increase the number of tasks we can search. However, after some back and forth on the mailing list, he recommended we instead revert the original patch, as it seems likely no one was actually getting hit by the original issue.
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
Linux KernelOperating system
>= 6.1, < 6.1.100>= 6.2, < 6.6.41>= 6.7, < 6.9.10CVSS 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 · scoped6.1.1006.6.416.9.10
6.1.100+ or 6.6.41+ or 6.9.10+ (depending on which major version line you are on)
- Identify the current kernel version using 'uname -r'
- Check if the current version falls within the affected range: 6.1.x where x < 100, 6.2.x through 6.5.x, 6.6.x where x < 41, 6.7.x through 6.9.x where x < 10
- For systems running 6.1.x series, upgrade to kernel 6.1.100 or later
- For systems running 6.2.x through 6.6.x series, upgrade to kernel 6.6.41 or later
- For systems running 6.7.x through 6.9.x series, upgrade to kernel 6.9.10 or later
- Reboot the system to load the new kernel
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-2024-42245 — 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-2024-42245 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