CVE-2025-40007

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: netfs: fix reference leak Commit 20d72b00ca81 ("netfs: Fix the request's work item to not require a ref") modified netfs_alloc_request() to initialize the reference counter to 2 instead of 1. The rationale was that the requet's "work" would release the second reference after completion (via netfs_{read,write}_collection_worker()). That works most of the time if all goes well. However, it leaks this additional reference if the request is released before the I/O operation has been submitted: the error code path only decrements the reference counter once and the work item will never be queued because there will never be a completion. This has caused outages of our whole server cluster today because tasks were blocked in netfs_wait_for_outstanding_io(), leading to deadlocks in Ceph (another bug that I will address soon in another patch). This was caused by a netfs_pgpriv2_begin_copy_to_cache() call which failed in fscache_begin_write_operation(). The leaked netfs_io_request was never completed, leaving `netfs_inode.io_count` with a positive value forever. All of this is super-fragile code. Finding out which code paths will lead to an eventual completion and which do not is hard to see: - Some functions like netfs_create_write_req() allocate a request, but will never submit any I/O. - netfs_unbuffered_read_iter_locked() calls netfs_unbuffered_read() and then netfs_put_request(); however, netfs_unbuffered_read() can also fail early before submitting the I/O request, therefore another netfs_put_request() call must be added there. A rule of thumb is that functions that return a `netfs_io_request` do not submit I/O, and all of their callers must be checked. For my taste, the whole netfs code needs an overhaul to make reference counting easier to understand and less fragile & obscure. But to fix this bug here and now and produce a patch that is adequate for a stable backport, I tried a minimal approach that quickly frees the request object upon early failure. I decided against adding a second netfs_put_request() each time because that would cause code duplication which obscures the code further. Instead, I added the function netfs_put_failed_request() which frees such a failed request synchronously under the assumption that the reference count is exactly 2 (as initially set by netfs_alloc_request() and never touched), verified by a WARN_ON_ONCE(). It then deinitializes the request object (without going through the "cleanup_work" indirection) and frees the allocation (with RCU protection to protect against concurrent access by netfs_requests_seq_start()). All code paths that fail early have been changed to call netfs_put_failed_request() instead of netfs_put_request(). Additionally, I have added a netfs_put_request() call to netfs_unbuffered_read() as explained above because the netfs_put_failed_request() approach does not work there.

Package Linux Kernel
Published 2025-10-20
Last modified 2026-04-15
Patch available
Yes

Affected versions

Linux kernel versions 6.15.3, 6.16 and later are affected. Fixed in 6.16.10, 6.17 and their respective stable series.

Affected from
≥ 6.15.3 ≥ 6.16
Fixed in
✓ 6.16.10 6.16.x ✓ 6.17

References

The following references provide additional information about CVE-2025-40007 including vendor advisories, patch commits, exploit details, and third-party analysis. Links are sourced from the NIST NVD database.

Frequently asked questions

  • What is CVE-2025-40007?

    CVE-2025-40007 is a unscored severity Linux kernel vulnerability . It affects Linux kernel versions from 6.15.3 onward and has been patched in 6.16.10 and 6.17. CVE-2025-40007 has not been confirmed as actively exploited and is not listed in the CISA KEV catalog.

  • Is there a patch available for CVE-2025-40007?

    Yes — CVE-2025-40007 has been patched. Fixed versions include 6.16.10 and 6.17. If you are running Linux kernel 6.15.3 or later up to the fix versions, apply the relevant patch for your kernel branch.

  • Is CVE-2025-40007 actively exploited?

    No — CVE-2025-40007 has not been confirmed as actively exploited. It is not listed in the CISA Known Exploited Vulnerabilities (KEV) catalog.