CVE-2023-53022

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: enetc: avoid deadlock in enetc_tx_onestep_tstamp() This lockdep splat says it better than I could: ================================ WARNING: inconsistent lock state 6.2.0-rc2-07010-ga9b9500ffaac-dirty #967 Not tainted -------------------------------- inconsistent {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} -> {SOFTIRQ-ON-W} usage. kworker/1:3/179 [HC0[0]:SC0[0]:HE1:SE1] takes: ffff3ec4036ce098 (_xmit_ETHER#2){+.?.}-{3:3}, at: netif_freeze_queues+0x5c/0xc0 {IN-SOFTIRQ-W} state was registered at: _raw_spin_lock+0x5c/0xc0 sch_direct_xmit+0x148/0x37c __dev_queue_xmit+0x528/0x111c ip6_finish_output2+0x5ec/0xb7c ip6_finish_output+0x240/0x3f0 ip6_output+0x78/0x360 ndisc_send_skb+0x33c/0x85c ndisc_send_rs+0x54/0x12c addrconf_rs_timer+0x154/0x260 call_timer_fn+0xb8/0x3a0 __run_timers.part.0+0x214/0x26c run_timer_softirq+0x3c/0x74 __do_softirq+0x14c/0x5d8 ____do_softirq+0x10/0x20 call_on_irq_stack+0x2c/0x5c do_softirq_own_stack+0x1c/0x30 __irq_exit_rcu+0x168/0x1a0 irq_exit_rcu+0x10/0x40 el1_interrupt+0x38/0x64 irq event stamp: 7825 hardirqs last enabled at (7825): [<ffffdf1f7200cae4>] exit_to_kernel_mode+0x34/0x130 hardirqs last disabled at (7823): [<ffffdf1f708105f0>] __do_softirq+0x550/0x5d8 softirqs last enabled at (7824): [<ffffdf1f7081050c>] __do_softirq+0x46c/0x5d8 softirqs last disabled at (7811): [<ffffdf1f708166e0>] ____do_softirq+0x10/0x20 other info that might help us debug this: Possible unsafe locking scenario: CPU0 ---- lock(_xmit_ETHER#2); <Interrupt> lock(_xmit_ETHER#2); *** DEADLOCK *** 3 locks held by kworker/1:3/179: #0: ffff3ec400004748 ((wq_completion)events){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1f4/0x6c0 #1: ffff80000a0bbdc8 ((work_completion)(&priv->tx_onestep_tstamp)){+.+.}-{0:0}, at: process_one_work+0x1f4/0x6c0 #2: ffff3ec4036cd438 (&dev->tx_global_lock){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: netif_tx_lock+0x1c/0x34 Workqueue: events enetc_tx_onestep_tstamp Call trace: print_usage_bug.part.0+0x208/0x22c mark_lock+0x7f0/0x8b0 __lock_acquire+0x7c4/0x1ce0 lock_acquire.part.0+0xe0/0x220 lock_acquire+0x68/0x84 _raw_spin_lock+0x5c/0xc0 netif_freeze_queues+0x5c/0xc0 netif_tx_lock+0x24/0x34 enetc_tx_onestep_tstamp+0x20/0x100 process_one_work+0x28c/0x6c0 worker_thread+0x74/0x450 kthread+0x118/0x11c but I'll say it anyway: the enetc_tx_onestep_tstamp() work item runs in process context, therefore with softirqs enabled (i.o.w., it can be interrupted by a softirq). If we hold the netif_tx_lock() when there is an interrupt, and the NET_TX softirq then gets scheduled, this will take the netif_tx_lock() a second time and deadlock the kernel. To solve this, use netif_tx_lock_bh(), which blocks softirqs from running.

At a glance

Exploitability

Can be exploited locally on the machine with a low-privilege account. High risk of service disruption.

Exploit odds

0.1% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).

Fix

A patch, advisory or fixed version is referenced. Upgrade or apply it.

Timeline

1. 2025-03-27 17:15 UTC PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
2. 2026-06-17 06:44 UTC Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

• Exploited in the wild: no, CISA does not list it.
• Exploit odds: 0.1% in the next 30 days (EPSS).
• Severity: 5.5 MEDIUM (CVSS).
• Fix: a patch or advisory is linked.

Details

Published

2025-03-27 17:15 UTC

Last modified

2026-06-17 06:44 UTC

Exploit probability

0.1% · EPSS, next 30 days

Weakness

CWE-667

Record status

Modified

Affected

• Linux Kernel < 5.15.91
• Linux Kernel < 6.1.9
• Linux Kernel 6.2

Attack profile CVSS 3.1 · 5.5

Attack vector

Local

Complexity

Low

Privileges needed

Low

User interaction

None

Scope

Unchanged

Confidentiality

None

Integrity

None

Availability

High

Is it in your code?

Hand this to your coding agent. It searches your project for the affected products and checks versions. Nothing leaves your machine.

Read https://cve-list.com/agent/cve/CVE-2023-53022.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2023-53022. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.

Copy as ticket · More options · Status badge