CVE-2025-38407
Vulnerability Scoring
Status: Awaiting Analysis
Published on: 25 Jul 2025, 14:15 UTC
CVSS Release:
CVE-2025-38407: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: riscv: cpu_ops_sbi: Use static array for boot_data Since commit 6b9f29b81b15 ("riscv: Enable pcpu page first chunk allocator"), if NUMA is enabled, the page percpu allocator may be used on very sparse configurations, or when requested on boot with percpu_alloc=page. In that case, percpu data gets put in the vmalloc area. However, sbi_hsm_hart_start() needs the physical address of a sbi_hart_boot_data, and simply assumes that __pa() would work. This causes the just started hart to immediately access an invalid address and hang. Fortunately, struct sbi_hart_boot_data is not too large, so we can simply allocate an array for boot_data statically, putting it in the kernel image. This fixes NUMA=y SMP boot on Sophgo SG2042. To reproduce on QEMU: Set CONFIG_NUMA=y and CONFIG_DEBUG_VIRTUAL=y, then run with: qemu-system-riscv64 -M virt -smp 2 -nographic \ -kernel arch/riscv/boot/Image \ -append "percpu_alloc=page" Kernel output: [ 0.000000] Booting Linux on hartid 0 [ 0.000000] Linux version 6.16.0-rc1 (dram@sakuya) (riscv64-unknown-linux-gnu-gcc (GCC) 14.2.1 20250322, GNU ld (GNU Binutils) 2.44) #11 SMP Tue Jun 24 14:56:22 CST 2025 ... [ 0.000000] percpu: 28 4K pages/cpu s85784 r8192 d20712 ... [ 0.083192] smp: Bringing up secondary CPUs ... [ 0.086722] ------------[ cut here ]------------ [ 0.086849] virt_to_phys used for non-linear address: (____ptrval____) (0xff2000000001d080) [ 0.088001] WARNING: CPU: 0 PID: 1 at arch/riscv/mm/physaddr.c:14 __virt_to_phys+0xae/0xe8 [ 0.088376] Modules linked in: [ 0.088656] CPU: 0 UID: 0 PID: 1 Comm: swapper/0 Not tainted 6.16.0-rc1 #11 NONE [ 0.088833] Hardware name: riscv-virtio,qemu (DT) [ 0.088948] epc : __virt_to_phys+0xae/0xe8 [ 0.089001] ra : __virt_to_phys+0xae/0xe8 [ 0.089037] epc : ffffffff80021eaa ra : ffffffff80021eaa sp : ff2000000004bbc0 [ 0.089057] gp : ffffffff817f49c0 tp : ff60000001d60000 t0 : 5f6f745f74726976 [ 0.089076] t1 : 0000000000000076 t2 : 705f6f745f747269 s0 : ff2000000004bbe0 [ 0.089095] s1 : ff2000000001d080 a0 : 0000000000000000 a1 : 0000000000000000 [ 0.089113] a2 : 0000000000000000 a3 : 0000000000000000 a4 : 0000000000000000 [ 0.089131] a5 : 0000000000000000 a6 : 0000000000000000 a7 : 0000000000000000 [ 0.089155] s2 : ffffffff8130dc00 s3 : 0000000000000001 s4 : 0000000000000001 [ 0.089174] s5 : ffffffff8185eff8 s6 : ff2000007f1eb000 s7 : ffffffff8002a2ec [ 0.089193] s8 : 0000000000000001 s9 : 0000000000000001 s10: 0000000000000000 [ 0.089211] s11: 0000000000000000 t3 : ffffffff8180a9f7 t4 : ffffffff8180a9f7 [ 0.089960] t5 : ffffffff8180a9f8 t6 : ff2000000004b9d8 [ 0.089984] status: 0000000200000120 badaddr: ffffffff80021eaa cause: 0000000000000003 [ 0.090101] [<ffffffff80021eaa>] __virt_to_phys+0xae/0xe8 [ 0.090228] [<ffffffff8001d796>] sbi_cpu_start+0x6e/0xe8 [ 0.090247] [<ffffffff8001a5da>] __cpu_up+0x1e/0x8c [ 0.090260] [<ffffffff8002a32e>] bringup_cpu+0x42/0x258 [ 0.090277] [<ffffffff8002914c>] cpuhp_invoke_callback+0xe0/0x40c [ 0.090292] [<ffffffff800294e0>] __cpuhp_invoke_callback_range+0x68/0xfc [ 0.090320] [<ffffffff8002a96a>] _cpu_up+0x11a/0x244 [ 0.090334] [<ffffffff8002aae6>] cpu_up+0x52/0x90 [ 0.090384] [<ffffffff80c09350>] bringup_nonboot_cpus+0x78/0x118 [ 0.090411] [<ffffffff80c11060>] smp_init+0x34/0xb8 [ 0.090425] [<ffffffff80c01220>] kernel_init_freeable+0x148/0x2e4 [ 0.090442] [<ffffffff80b83802>] kernel_init+0x1e/0x14c [ 0.090455] [<ffffffff800124ca>] ret_from_fork_kernel+0xe/0xf0 [ 0.090471] [<ffffffff80b8d9c2>] ret_from_fork_kernel_asm+0x16/0x18 [ 0.090560] ---[ end trace 0000000000000000 ]--- [ 1.179875] CPU1: failed to come online [ 1.190324] smp: Brought up 1 node, 1 CPU
The exploitability of CVE-2025-38407 depends on two key factors: attack complexity (the level of effort required to execute an exploit) and privileges required (the access level an attacker needs).
No exploitability data is available for CVE-2025-38407.
A lower complexity and fewer privilege requirements make exploitation easier. Security teams should evaluate these aspects to determine the urgency of mitigation strategies, such as patch management and access control policies.
Attack Complexity (AC) measures the difficulty in executing an exploit. A high AC means that specific conditions must be met, making an attack more challenging, while a low AC means the vulnerability can be exploited with minimal effort.
Privileges Required (PR) determine the level of system access necessary for an attack. Vulnerabilities requiring no privileges are more accessible to attackers, whereas high privilege requirements limit exploitation to authorized users with elevated access.
Above is the CVSS Sub-score Breakdown for CVE-2025-38407, illustrating how Base, Impact, and Exploitability factors combine to form the overall severity rating. A higher sub-score typically indicates a more severe or easier-to-exploit vulnerability.
Below is the Impact Analysis for CVE-2025-38407, showing how Confidentiality, Integrity, and Availability might be affected if the vulnerability is exploited. Higher values usually signal greater potential damage.
Unknown
Stay updated with real-time CVE vulnerabilities and take action to secure your systems. Enhance your cybersecurity posture with the latest threat intelligence and mitigation techniques. Develop the skills necessary to defend against CVEs and secure critical infrastructures. Join the top cybersecurity professionals safeguarding today's infrastructures.