{"cve":"CVE-2024-27005","nvd":{"published":"2024-05-01T06:15:18.883","modified":"2026-10-30T13:17:24.390","status":"Modified","description":"In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\ninterconnect: Don't access req_list while it's being manipulated\n\nThe icc_lock mutex was split into separate icc_lock and icc_bw_lock\nmutexes in [1] to avoid lockdep splats. However, this didn't adequately\nprotect access to icc_node::req_list.\n\nThe icc_set_bw() function will eventually iterate over req_list while\nonly holding icc_bw_lock, but req_list can be modified while only\nholding icc_lock. This causes races between icc_set_bw(), of_icc_get(),\nand icc_put().\n\nExample A:\n\n  CPU0                               CPU1\n  ----                               ----\n  icc_set_bw(path_a)\n    mutex_lock(&icc_bw_lock);\n                                     icc_put(path_b)\n                                       mutex_lock(&icc_lock);\n    aggregate_requests()\n      hlist_for_each_entry(r, ...\n                                       hlist_del(...\n        <r = invalid pointer>\n\nExample B:\n\n  CPU0                               CPU1\n  ----                               ----\n  icc_set_bw(path_a)\n    mutex_lock(&icc_bw_lock);\n                                     path_b = of_icc_get()\n                                       of_icc_get_by_index()\n                                         mutex_lock(&icc_lock);\n                                         path_find()\n                                           path_init()\n    aggregate_requests()\n      hlist_for_each_entry(r, ...\n                                             hlist_add_head(...\n        <r = invalid pointer>\n\nFix this by ensuring icc_bw_lock is always held before manipulating\nicc_node::req_list. The additional places icc_bw_lock is held don't\nperform any memory allocations, so we should still be safe from the\noriginal lockdep splats that motivated the separate locks.\n\n[1] commit af42269c3523 (\"interconnect: Fix locking for runpm vs reclaim\")","cvss_v4":null,"cvss_v3":{"version":"3.1","vector":"CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H","score":7.8},"cwes":["CWE-362","CWE-667"],"references":["https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/19ec82b3cad1abef2a929262b8c1528f4e0c192d","https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4c65507121ea8e0b47fae6d2049c8688390d46b6","https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/8401bc2c188030fb14d1cb43c402a1cf42d86dd2","https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/d0d04efa2e367921654b5106cc5c05e3757c2b42","https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/de1bf25b6d771abdb52d43546cf57ad775fb68a1"],"products":["linux:linux_kernel"],"source":"nvd","synced_at":"2026-10-30T13:47:47.119061695+00:00"},"epss":{"cve":"CVE-2024-27005","score":0.00181,"percentile":0.0768,"date":"2026-10-30"},"kev":null,"osv":[],"attribution":["This product uses the NVD API but is not endorsed or certified by the NVD.","EPSS scores: FIRST Exploit Prediction Scoring System, https://www.first.org/epss","Known exploited vulnerabilities: CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities Catalog, https://www.cisa.gov/known-exploited-vulnerabilities-catalog","Package advisories: OSV (https://osv.dev), from the GitHub Advisory Database, PyPA, Go, RustSec and other ecosystem databases, under CC-BY 4.0 or CC0","CVE records: the CVE Program's CVE List (https://www.cve.org), under its terms of use (https://www.cve.org/Legal/TermsOfUse). CVE is a registered trademark of The MITRE Corporation; this product is not affiliated with the CVE Program."]}