BDU:2025-11507

CVE-2025-38433

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: riscv: fix runtime constant support for nommu kernels the `__runtime_fixup_32` function does not handle the case where `val` is zero correctly (as might occur when patching a nommu kernel and referring to a physical address below the 4GiB boundary whose upper 32 bits are all zero) because nothing in the existing logic prevents the code from taking the `else` branch of both nop-checks and emitting two `nop` instructions. This leaves random garbage in the register that is supposed to receive the upper 32 bits of the pointer instead of zero that when combined with the value for the lower 32 bits yields an invalid pointer and causes a kernel panic when that pointer is eventually accessed. The author clearly considered the fact that if the `lui` is converted into a `nop` that the second instruction needs to be adjusted to become an `li` instead of an `addi`, hence introducing the `addi_insn_mask` variable, but didn't fol...

CVE-2025-38433

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: riscv: fix runtime constant support for nommu kernels the `__runtime_fixup_32` function does not handle the case where `val` is zero correctly (as might occur when patching a nommu kernel and referring to a physical address below the 4GiB boundary whose upper 32 bits are all zero) because nothing in the existing logic prevents the code from taking the `else` branch of both nop-checks and emitting two `nop` instructions. This leaves random garbage in the register that is supposed to receive the upper 32 bits of the pointer instead of zero that when combined with the value for the lower 32 bits yields an invalid pointer and causes a kernel panic when that pointer is eventually accessed. The author clearly considered the fact that if the `lui` is converted into a `nop` that the second instruction needs to be adjusted to become an `li` instead of an `addi`, hence introducing the `addi_insn_mask` variable, but didn't fol...

CVE-2025-38433

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: riscv: fix runtime constant support for nommu kernels the `__runtime_fixup_32` function does not handle the case where `val` is zero correctly (as might occur when patching a nommu kernel and referring to a physical address below the 4GiB boundary whose upper 32 bits are all zero) because nothing in the existing logic prevents the code from taking the `else` branch of both nop-checks and emitting two `nop` instructions. This leaves random garbage in the register that is supposed to receive the upper 32 bits of the pointer instead of zero that when combined with the value for the lower 32 bits yields an invalid pointer and causes a kernel panic when that pointer is eventually accessed. The author clearly considered the fact that if the `lui` is converted into a `nop` that the second instruction needs to be adjusted to become an `li` instead of an `addi`, hence introducing the `addi_insn_mask` variable, but didn't fo

CVE-2025-38433

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

GHSA-w922-jv62-78r5

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: riscv: fix runtime constant support for nommu kernels the `__runtime_fixup_32` function does not handle the case where `val` is zero correctly (as might occur when patching a nommu kernel and referring to a physical address below the 4GiB boundary whose upper 32 bits are all zero) because nothing in the existing logic prevents the code from taking the `else` branch of both nop-checks and emitting two `nop` instructions. This leaves random garbage in the register that is supposed to receive the upper 32 bits of the pointer instead of zero that when combined with the value for the lower 32 bits yields an invalid pointer and causes a kernel panic when that pointer is eventually accessed. The author clearly considered the fact that if the `lui` is converted into a `nop` that the second instruction needs to be adjusted to become an `li` instead of an `addi`, hence introducing the `addi_insn_mask` variable, but didn't...