Количество 13
Количество 13
GHSA-jvvm-77gw-35g5
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf/core: Order the PMU list to fix warning about unordered pmu_ctx_list Syskaller triggers a warning due to prev_epc->pmu != next_epc->pmu in perf_event_swap_task_ctx_data(). vmcore shows that two lists have the same perf_event_pmu_context, but not in the same order. The problem is that the order of pmu_ctx_list for the parent is impacted by the time when an event/PMU is added. While the order for a child is impacted by the event order in the pinned_groups and flexible_groups. So the order of pmu_ctx_list in the parent and child may be different. To fix this problem, insert the perf_event_pmu_context to its proper place after iteration of the pmu_ctx_list. The follow testcase can trigger above warning: # perf record -e cycles --call-graph lbr -- taskset -c 3 ./a.out & # perf stat -e cpu-clock,cs -p xxx // xxx is the pid of a.out test.c void main() { int count = 0; pid_t pid; pr...

CVE-2025-21895
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf/core: Order the PMU list to fix warning about unordered pmu_ctx_list Syskaller triggers a warning due to prev_epc->pmu != next_epc->pmu in perf_event_swap_task_ctx_data(). vmcore shows that two lists have the same perf_event_pmu_context, but not in the same order. The problem is that the order of pmu_ctx_list for the parent is impacted by the time when an event/PMU is added. While the order for a child is impacted by the event order in the pinned_groups and flexible_groups. So the order of pmu_ctx_list in the parent and child may be different. To fix this problem, insert the perf_event_pmu_context to its proper place after iteration of the pmu_ctx_list. The follow testcase can trigger above warning: # perf record -e cycles --call-graph lbr -- taskset -c 3 ./a.out & # perf stat -e cpu-clock,cs -p xxx // xxx is the pid of a.out test.c void main() { int count = 0; pid_t pid; printf("%d running\n", getpid(...

CVE-2025-21895
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf/core: Order the PMU list to fix warning about unordered pmu_ctx_list Syskaller triggers a warning due to prev_epc->pmu != next_epc->pmu in perf_event_swap_task_ctx_data(). vmcore shows that two lists have the same perf_event_pmu_context, but not in the same order. The problem is that the order of pmu_ctx_list for the parent is impacted by the time when an event/PMU is added. While the order for a child is impacted by the event order in the pinned_groups and flexible_groups. So the order of pmu_ctx_list in the parent and child may be different. To fix this problem, insert the perf_event_pmu_context to its proper place after iteration of the pmu_ctx_list. The follow testcase can trigger above warning: # perf record -e cycles --call-graph lbr -- taskset -c 3 ./a.out & # perf stat -e cpu-clock,cs -p xxx // xxx is the pid of a.out test.c void main() { int count = 0; pid_t pid; printf("%d running\n", getpid()); sleep...

CVE-2025-21895
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf/core: Order the PMU list to fix warning about unordered pmu_ctx_list Syskaller triggers a warning due to prev_epc->pmu != next_epc->pmu in perf_event_swap_task_ctx_data(). vmcore shows that two lists have the same perf_event_pmu_context, but not in the same order. The problem is that the order of pmu_ctx_list for the parent is impacted by the time when an event/PMU is added. While the order for a child is impacted by the event order in the pinned_groups and flexible_groups. So the order of pmu_ctx_list in the parent and child may be different. To fix this problem, insert the perf_event_pmu_context to its proper place after iteration of the pmu_ctx_list. The follow testcase can trigger above warning: # perf record -e cycles --call-graph lbr -- taskset -c 3 ./a.out & # perf stat -e cpu-clock,cs -p xxx // xxx is the pid of a.out test.c void main() { int count = 0; pid_t pid; print
CVE-2025-21895
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: p ...

BDU:2025-04452
Уязвимость функции perf_event_swap_task_ctx_data ядра операционной системы Linux, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании

SUSE-SU-2025:01707-1
Security update for the Linux Kernel

SUSE-SU-2025:01614-1
Security update for the Linux Kernel

SUSE-SU-2025:01951-1
Security update for the Linux Kernel

SUSE-SU-2025:01967-1
Security update for the Linux Kernel

SUSE-SU-2025:01964-1
Security update for the Linux Kernel

SUSE-SU-2025:01919-1
Security update for the Linux Kernel
ELSA-2025-20480
ELSA-2025-20480: Unbreakable Enterprise kernel security update (IMPORTANT)
Уязвимостей на страницу
Уязвимость | CVSS | EPSS | Опубликовано | |
---|---|---|---|---|
GHSA-jvvm-77gw-35g5 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf/core: Order the PMU list to fix warning about unordered pmu_ctx_list Syskaller triggers a warning due to prev_epc->pmu != next_epc->pmu in perf_event_swap_task_ctx_data(). vmcore shows that two lists have the same perf_event_pmu_context, but not in the same order. The problem is that the order of pmu_ctx_list for the parent is impacted by the time when an event/PMU is added. While the order for a child is impacted by the event order in the pinned_groups and flexible_groups. So the order of pmu_ctx_list in the parent and child may be different. To fix this problem, insert the perf_event_pmu_context to its proper place after iteration of the pmu_ctx_list. The follow testcase can trigger above warning: # perf record -e cycles --call-graph lbr -- taskset -c 3 ./a.out & # perf stat -e cpu-clock,cs -p xxx // xxx is the pid of a.out test.c void main() { int count = 0; pid_t pid; pr... | 0% Низкий | 4 месяца назад | ||
![]() | CVE-2025-21895 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf/core: Order the PMU list to fix warning about unordered pmu_ctx_list Syskaller triggers a warning due to prev_epc->pmu != next_epc->pmu in perf_event_swap_task_ctx_data(). vmcore shows that two lists have the same perf_event_pmu_context, but not in the same order. The problem is that the order of pmu_ctx_list for the parent is impacted by the time when an event/PMU is added. While the order for a child is impacted by the event order in the pinned_groups and flexible_groups. So the order of pmu_ctx_list in the parent and child may be different. To fix this problem, insert the perf_event_pmu_context to its proper place after iteration of the pmu_ctx_list. The follow testcase can trigger above warning: # perf record -e cycles --call-graph lbr -- taskset -c 3 ./a.out & # perf stat -e cpu-clock,cs -p xxx // xxx is the pid of a.out test.c void main() { int count = 0; pid_t pid; printf("%d running\n", getpid(... | 0% Низкий | 4 месяца назад | |
![]() | CVE-2025-21895 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf/core: Order the PMU list to fix warning about unordered pmu_ctx_list Syskaller triggers a warning due to prev_epc->pmu != next_epc->pmu in perf_event_swap_task_ctx_data(). vmcore shows that two lists have the same perf_event_pmu_context, but not in the same order. The problem is that the order of pmu_ctx_list for the parent is impacted by the time when an event/PMU is added. While the order for a child is impacted by the event order in the pinned_groups and flexible_groups. So the order of pmu_ctx_list in the parent and child may be different. To fix this problem, insert the perf_event_pmu_context to its proper place after iteration of the pmu_ctx_list. The follow testcase can trigger above warning: # perf record -e cycles --call-graph lbr -- taskset -c 3 ./a.out & # perf stat -e cpu-clock,cs -p xxx // xxx is the pid of a.out test.c void main() { int count = 0; pid_t pid; printf("%d running\n", getpid()); sleep... | CVSS3: 2.5 | 0% Низкий | 4 месяца назад |
![]() | CVE-2025-21895 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: perf/core: Order the PMU list to fix warning about unordered pmu_ctx_list Syskaller triggers a warning due to prev_epc->pmu != next_epc->pmu in perf_event_swap_task_ctx_data(). vmcore shows that two lists have the same perf_event_pmu_context, but not in the same order. The problem is that the order of pmu_ctx_list for the parent is impacted by the time when an event/PMU is added. While the order for a child is impacted by the event order in the pinned_groups and flexible_groups. So the order of pmu_ctx_list in the parent and child may be different. To fix this problem, insert the perf_event_pmu_context to its proper place after iteration of the pmu_ctx_list. The follow testcase can trigger above warning: # perf record -e cycles --call-graph lbr -- taskset -c 3 ./a.out & # perf stat -e cpu-clock,cs -p xxx // xxx is the pid of a.out test.c void main() { int count = 0; pid_t pid; print | 0% Низкий | 4 месяца назад | |
CVE-2025-21895 In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: p ... | 0% Низкий | 4 месяца назад | ||
![]() | BDU:2025-04452 Уязвимость функции perf_event_swap_task_ctx_data ядра операционной системы Linux, позволяющая нарушителю вызвать отказ в обслуживании | CVSS3: 4.8 | 0% Низкий | 6 месяцев назад |
![]() | SUSE-SU-2025:01707-1 Security update for the Linux Kernel | около 2 месяцев назад | ||
![]() | SUSE-SU-2025:01614-1 Security update for the Linux Kernel | 2 месяца назад | ||
![]() | SUSE-SU-2025:01951-1 Security update for the Linux Kernel | около 1 месяца назад | ||
![]() | SUSE-SU-2025:01967-1 Security update for the Linux Kernel | около 1 месяца назад | ||
![]() | SUSE-SU-2025:01964-1 Security update for the Linux Kernel | около 1 месяца назад | ||
![]() | SUSE-SU-2025:01919-1 Security update for the Linux Kernel | около 1 месяца назад | ||
ELSA-2025-20480 ELSA-2025-20480: Unbreakable Enterprise kernel security update (IMPORTANT) | 4 дня назад |
Уязвимостей на страницу