CVE-20XX-?
agent?

CVE-2025-37821

5.5 MEDIUM 0.2% exploit odds Fix listed Memory safety OS & kernel

What it is

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sched/eevdf: Fix se->slice being set to U64_MAX and resulting crash There is a code path in dequeue_entities() that can set the slice of a sched_entity to U64_MAX, which sometimes results in a crash. The offending case is when dequeue_entities() is called to dequeue a delayed group entity, and then the entity's parent's dequeue is delayed. In that case: 1. In the if (entity_is_task(se)) else block at the beginning of dequeue_entities(), slice is set to cfs_rq_min_slice(group_cfs_rq(se)). If the entity was delayed, then it has no queued tasks, so cfs_rq_min_slice() returns U64_MAX. 2. The first for_each_sched_entity() loop dequeues the entity. 3. If the entity was its parent's only child, then the next iteration tries to dequeue the parent. 4. If the parent's dequeue needs to be delayed, then it breaks from the first for_each_sched_entity() loop _without updating slice_. 5. The second for_each_sched_entity() loop sets the parent's ->slice to the saved slice, which is still U64_MAX. This throws off subsequent calculations with potentially catastrophic results. A manifestation we saw in production was: 6. In update_entity_lag(), se->slice is used to calculate limit, which ends up as a huge negative number. 7. limit is used in se->vlag = clamp(vlag, -limit, limit). Because limit is negative, vlag > limit, so se->vlag is set to the same huge negative number. 8. In place_entity(), se->vlag is scaled, which overflows and results in another huge (positive or negative) number. 9. The adjusted lag is subtracted from se->vruntime, which increases or decreases se->vruntime by a huge number. 10. pick_eevdf() calls entity_eligible()/vruntime_eligible(), which incorrectly returns false because the vruntime is so far from the other vruntimes on the queue, causing the (vruntime - cfs_rq->min_vruntime) * load calulation to overflow. 11. Nothing appears to be eligible, so pick_eevdf() returns NULL. 12. pick_next_entity() tries to dereference the return value of pick_eevdf() and crashes. Dumping the cfs_rq states from the core dumps with drgn showed tell-tale huge vruntime ranges and bogus vlag values, and I also traced se->slice being set to U64_MAX on live systems (which was usually "benign" since the rest of the runqueue needed to be in a particular state to crash). Fix it in dequeue_entities() by always setting slice from the first non-empty cfs_rq.

At a glance

Exploitability
Can be exploited locally on the machine with a low-privilege account. High risk of service disruption.
Exploit odds
0.2% chance of exploitation in the next 30 days (EPSS).
Fix
A patch, advisory or fixed version is referenced. Upgrade or apply it.

Timeline

  1. PublishedDisclosed publicly on CVE.org and NVD
  2. Last updatedMost recent change to the record

Why it ranks here

Details

Published
Last modified
Exploit probability
0.2% · EPSS, next 30 days
Weakness
CWE-476 · NULL pointer dereference
Record status
Analyzed

Affected

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
Raw vector

CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H

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-2025-37821.md and follow it. Check whether this project is affected by CVE-2025-37821. Read only. Don't change anything and don't upload my code. Tell me yes, no or not sure, with the file as proof.

· More options · Status badge

Meme: I wake up, CVE-2025-37821
Download Square Reddit

Fix and advisories

References

NVD record · CVE.org record