ghsa-qq6g-5658-hpx2
Vulnerability from github
Published
2025-12-30 15:30
Modified
2025-12-30 15:30
Details

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:

soundwire: bus: Fix unbalanced pm_runtime_put() causing usage count underflow

This reverts commit 443a98e649b4 ("soundwire: bus: use pm_runtime_resume_and_get()")

Change calls to pm_runtime_resume_and_get() back to pm_runtime_get_sync(). This fixes a usage count underrun caused by doing a pm_runtime_put() even though pm_runtime_resume_and_get() returned an error.

The three affected functions ignore -EACCES error from trying to get pm_runtime, and carry on, including a put at the end of the function. But pm_runtime_resume_and_get() does not increment the usage count if it returns an error. So in the -EACCES case you must not call pm_runtime_put().

The documentation for pm_runtime_get_sync() says: "Consider using pm_runtime_resume_and_get() ... as this is likely to result in cleaner code."

In this case I don't think it results in cleaner code because the pm_runtime_put() at the end of the function would have to be conditional on the return value from pm_runtime_resume_and_get() at the top of the function.

pm_runtime_get_sync() doesn't have this problem because it always increments the count, so always needs a put. The code can just flow through and do the pm_runtime_put() unconditionally.

Show details on source website


{
  "affected": [],
  "aliases": [
    "CVE-2023-54259"
  ],
  "database_specific": {
    "cwe_ids": [],
    "github_reviewed": false,
    "github_reviewed_at": null,
    "nvd_published_at": "2025-12-30T13:16:14Z",
    "severity": null
  },
  "details": "In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:\n\nsoundwire: bus: Fix unbalanced pm_runtime_put() causing usage count underflow\n\nThis reverts commit\n443a98e649b4 (\"soundwire: bus: use pm_runtime_resume_and_get()\")\n\nChange calls to pm_runtime_resume_and_get() back to pm_runtime_get_sync().\nThis fixes a usage count underrun caused by doing a pm_runtime_put() even\nthough pm_runtime_resume_and_get() returned an error.\n\nThe three affected functions ignore -EACCES error from trying to get\npm_runtime, and carry on, including a put at the end of the function.\nBut pm_runtime_resume_and_get() does not increment the usage count if it\nreturns an error. So in the -EACCES case you must not call\npm_runtime_put().\n\nThe documentation for pm_runtime_get_sync() says:\n \"Consider using pm_runtime_resume_and_get() ...  as this is likely to\n result in cleaner code.\"\n\nIn this case I don\u0027t think it results in cleaner code because the\npm_runtime_put() at the end of the function would have to be conditional on\nthe return value from pm_runtime_resume_and_get() at the top of the\nfunction.\n\npm_runtime_get_sync() doesn\u0027t have this problem because it always\nincrements the count, so always needs a put. The code can just flow through\nand do the pm_runtime_put() unconditionally.",
  "id": "GHSA-qq6g-5658-hpx2",
  "modified": "2025-12-30T15:30:34Z",
  "published": "2025-12-30T15:30:34Z",
  "references": [
    {
      "type": "ADVISORY",
      "url": "https://nvd.nist.gov/vuln/detail/CVE-2023-54259"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/203aa4374c433159f163acde2d0bd4118f23bbaf"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/4e5e9da139c007dfc397a159093b4c4187ee67fa"
    },
    {
      "type": "WEB",
      "url": "https://git.kernel.org/stable/c/e9537962519e88969f5f69cd0571eb4f6984403c"
    }
  ],
  "schema_version": "1.4.0",
  "severity": []
}


Log in or create an account to share your comment.




Tags
Taxonomy of the tags.


Loading…

Loading…

Loading…

Sightings

Author Source Type Date

Nomenclature

  • Seen: The vulnerability was mentioned, discussed, or seen somewhere by the user.
  • Confirmed: The vulnerability is confirmed from an analyst perspective.
  • Published Proof of Concept: A public proof of concept is available for this vulnerability.
  • Exploited: This vulnerability was exploited and seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Patched: This vulnerability was successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not exploited: This vulnerability was not exploited or seen by the user reporting the sighting.
  • Not confirmed: The user expresses doubt about the veracity of the vulnerability.
  • Not patched: This vulnerability was not successfully patched by the user reporting the sighting.


Loading…

Loading…