CVE-2025-38372
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: RDMA/mlx5: Fix unsafe xarray access in implicit ODP handling __xa_store() and __xa_erase() were used without holding the proper lock, which led to a lockdep warning due to unsafe RCU usage. This patch replaces them with xa_store() and xa_erase(), which perform the necessary locking internally. ============================= WARNING: suspicious RCPU usage 6.14.0-rc7_for_upstream_debug_2025_03_18_15_01 #1 Not tainted ----------------------------- ./include/linux/xarray.h:1211 suspicious rcu_dereference_protected() usage! other info that might help us debug this: rcu_scheduler_active = 2, debug_locks = 1 3 locks held by kworker/u136:0/219: at: process_one_work+0xbe4/0x15f0 process_one_work+0x75c/0x15f0 pagefault_mr+0x9a5/0x1390 [mlx5_ib] stack backtrace: CPU: 14 UID: 0 PID: 219 Comm: kworker/u136:0 Not tainted 6.14.0-rc7_for_upstream_debug_2025_03_18_15_01 #1 Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (Q35 + ICH9, 2009), BIOS rel-1.16.0-0-gd239552ce722-prebuilt.qemu.org 04/01/2014 Workqueue: mlx5_ib_page_fault mlx5_ib_eqe_pf_action [mlx5_ib] Call Trace: dump_stack_lvl+0xa8/0xc0 lockdep_rcu_suspicious+0x1e6/0x260 xas_create+0xb8a/0xee0 xas_store+0x73/0x14c0 __xa_store+0x13c/0x220 ? xa_store_range+0x390/0x390 ? spin_bug+0x1d0/0x1d0 pagefault_mr+0xcb5/0x1390 [mlx5_ib] ? _raw_spin_unlock+0x1f/0x30 mlx5_ib_eqe_pf_action+0x3be/0x2620 [mlx5_ib] ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x400/0x400 ? mlx5_ib_invalidate_range+0xcb0/0xcb0 [mlx5_ib] process_one_work+0x7db/0x15f0 ? pwq_dec_nr_in_flight+0xda0/0xda0 ? assign_work+0x168/0x240 worker_thread+0x57d/0xcd0 ? rescuer_thread+0xc40/0xc40 kthread+0x3b3/0x800 ? kthread_is_per_cpu+0xb0/0xb0 ? lock_downgrade+0x680/0x680 ? do_raw_spin_lock+0x12d/0x270 ? spin_bug+0x1d0/0x1d0 ? finish_task_switch.isra.0+0x284/0x9e0 ? lockdep_hardirqs_on_prepare+0x284/0x400 ? kthread_is_per_cpu+0xb0/0xb0 ret_from_fork+0x2d/0x70 ? kthread_is_per_cpu+0xb0/0xb0 ret_from_fork_asm+0x11/0x20
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>= 6.12.13, < 6.12.37>= 6.13.2, < 6.15.6= 6.16CVSS 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 · scoped6.12.376.15.6
Linux Kernel 6.12.37, 6.15.6, or later stable releases
- Identify the current running kernel version using 'uname -r'
- Based on the affected version range, determine the minimum fixed kernel version needed: For 6.12.x kernels: upgrade to >= 6.12.37; For 6.13.x-6.14.x kernels: upgrade to >= 6.15.6; For 6.16.x kernels: upgrade to a version containing the fix
- Upgrade the kernel package using the distribution's package manager (e.g., 'apt-get dist-upgrade', 'yum update', or 'dnf upgrade' for RHEL-based systems)
- Reboot the system to load the patched kernel
- Verify the fix is applied by checking the kernel version and confirming the commit 2c6b640ea08b is included in the release notes or by checking /proc/version after reboot
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-2025-38372 — 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-2025-38372 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