CVE-2025-22090
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: x86/mm/pat: Fix VM_PAT handling when fork() fails in copy_page_range() If track_pfn_copy() fails, we already added the dst VMA to the maple tree. As fork() fails, we'll cleanup the maple tree, and stumble over the dst VMA for which we neither performed any reservation nor copied any page tables. Consequently untrack_pfn() will see VM_PAT and try obtaining the PAT information from the page table -- which fails because the page table was not copied. The easiest fix would be to simply clear the VM_PAT flag of the dst VMA if track_pfn_copy() fails. However, the whole thing is about "simply" clearing the VM_PAT flag is shaky as well: if we passed track_pfn_copy() and performed a reservation, but copying the page tables fails, we'll simply clear the VM_PAT flag, not properly undoing the reservation ... which is also wrong. So let's fix it properly: set the VM_PAT flag only if the reservation succeeded (leaving it clear initially), and undo the reservation if anything goes wrong while copying the page tables: clearing the VM_PAT flag after undoing the reservation. Note that any copied page table entries will get zapped when the VMA will get removed later, after copy_page_range() succeeded; as VM_PAT is not set then, we won't try cleaning VM_PAT up once more and untrack_pfn() will be happy. Note that leaving these page tables in place without a reservation is not a problem, as we are aborting fork(); this process will never run. A reproducer can trigger this usually at the first try: https://gitlab.com/davidhildenbrand/scratchspace/-/raw/main/reproducers/pat_fork.c WARNING: CPU: 26 PID: 11650 at arch/x86/mm/pat/memtype.c:983 get_pat_info+0xf6/0x110 Modules linked in: ... CPU: 26 UID: 0 PID: 11650 Comm: repro3 Not tainted 6.12.0-rc5+ #92 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS 1.16.3-2.fc40 04/01/2014 RIP: 0010:get_pat_info+0xf6/0x110 ... Call Trace: <TASK> ... untrack_pfn+0x52/0x110 unmap_single_vma+0xa6/0xe0 unmap_vmas+0x105/0x1f0 exit_mmap+0xf6/0x460 __mmput+0x4b/0x120 copy_process+0x1bf6/0x2aa0 kernel_clone+0xab/0x440 __do_sys_clone+0x66/0x90 do_syscall_64+0x95/0x180 Likely this case was missed in: d155df53f310 ("x86/mm/pat: clear VM_PAT if copy_p4d_range failed") ... and instead of undoing the reservation we simply cleared the VM_PAT flag. Keep the documentation of these functions in include/linux/pgtable.h, one place is more than sufficient -- we should clean that up for the other functions like track_pfn_remap/untrack_pfn separately.
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 analysisA detailed technical summary for this CVE is being prepared.
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>= 2.6.29, < 6.6.87>= 6.7, < 6.12.23>= 6.13, < 6.13.11>= 6.14, < 6.14.2CVSS 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 · scoped6.6.876.12.236.13.11
6.14.2 (or 6.13.11, 6.12.23, or 6.6.87 depending on your current branch)
- Upgrade the Linux kernel to version 6.14.2 or later if running kernel 6.14.x
- If running kernel 6.13.x, upgrade to version 6.13.11 or later
- If running kernel 6.12.x, upgrade to version 6.12.23 or later
- If running kernel 6.7.x through 6.11.x, upgrade to version 6.6.87 or later
- If running kernel 6.6.x or earlier (but >= 2.6.29), upgrade to version 6.6.87 or later
- After kernel upgrade, reboot the system to load the fixed 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-2025-22090 — 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-2025-22090 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