Linux KernelOperating system · Linux
CVE-2025-39725
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: mm/vmscan: fix hwpoisoned large folio handling in shrink_folio_list In shrink_folio_list(), the hwpoisoned folio may be large folio, which can't be handled by unmap_poisoned_folio(). For THP, try_to_unmap_one() must be passed with TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD to split huge PMD first and then retry. Without TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD, we will trigger null-ptr deref of pvmw.pte. Even we passed TTU_SPLIT_HUGE_PMD, we will trigger a WARN_ON_ONCE due to the page isn't in swapcache. Since UCE is rare in real world, and race with reclaimation is more rare, just skipping the hwpoisoned large folio is enough. memory_failure() will handle it if the UCE is triggered again. This happens when memory reclaim for large folio races with memory_failure(), and will lead to kernel panic. The race is as follows: cpu0 cpu1 shrink_folio_list memory_failure TestSetPageHWPoison unmap_poisoned_folio --> trigger BUG_ON due to unmap_poisoned_folio couldn't handle large folio [[email protected]: add comment to unmap_poisoned_folio()]
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 analysisThe code follows a pointer that is null, crashing the process. An attacker who can reliably trigger it turns the crash into a denial of service. The fix is checking for null before use and handling the failure path gracefully.
General guidance for the null pointer dereference 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
>= 6.12.26, < 6.12.41>= 6.14.5, < 6.15.9= 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 · scoped6.12.416.15.9
Linux Kernel 6.12.41 / 6.15.9 / 6.16.1 (depending on which version branch you are on)
- Identify the currently running kernel version using 'uname -r'
- Determine which version range your kernel falls into: 6.12.x (affected: 6.12.26 through 6.12.40), 6.14.x (affected: 6.14.5 through 6.15.8), or 6.16.x (affected: 6.16.0)
- For 6.12.x kernels: upgrade to kernel version 6.12.41 or later
- For 6.14.x kernels: upgrade to kernel version 6.15.9 or later
- For 6.16.x kernels: upgrade to kernel version 6.16.1 or later, or apply the upstream patch commit 656eaddbc952e1baae2f69281c22debe22140312
- Reboot the system to 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-2025-39725 — 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-2025-39725 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