<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-10-04T00:21:07.808173+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-39905</id>
    <title>CVE-2025-39905 — net: phylink: add lock for serializing concurrent pl-&gt;phydev writes with resolver</title>
    <updated>2026-10-04T00:21:07.887343+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux</p>
<p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p>
<p>net: phylink: add lock for serializing concurrent pl-&gt;phydev writes with resolver</p>
<p>Currently phylink_resolve() protects itself against concurrent
phylink_bringup_phy() or phylink_disconnect_phy() calls which modify
pl-&gt;phydev by relying on pl-&gt;state_mutex.</p>
<p>The problem is that in phylink_resolve(), pl-&gt;state_mutex is in a lock
inversion state with pl-&gt;phydev-&gt;lock. So pl-&gt;phydev-&gt;lock needs to be
acquired prior to pl-&gt;state_mutex. But that requires dereferencing
pl-&gt;phydev in the first place, and without pl-&gt;state_mutex, that is
racy.</p>
<p>Hence the reason for the extra lock. Currently it is redundant, but it
will serve a functional purpose once mutex_lock(&amp;phy-&gt;lock) will be
moved outside of the mutex_lock(&amp;pl-&gt;state_mutex) section.</p>
<p>Another alternative considered would have been to let phylink_resolve()
acquire the rtnl_mutex, which is also held when phylink_bringup_phy()
and phylink_disconnect_phy() are called. But since phylink_disconnect_phy()
runs under rtnl_lock(), it would deadlock with phylink_resolve() when
calling flush_work(&amp;pl-&gt;resolve). Additionally, it would have been
undesirable because it would have unnecessarily blocked many other call
paths as well in the entire kernel, so the smaller-scoped lock was
preferred.</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-39905"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
