CVE-2025-39915

EPSS 0.0%
  • Published: 2025-10-01T08:15:34.647

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

net: phy: transfer phy_config_inband() locking responsibility to phylink

Problem description
===================

Lockdep reports a possible circular locking dependency (AB/BA) between
&pl->state_mutex and &phy->lock, as follows.

phylink_resolve() // acquires &pl->state_mutex
-> phylink_major_config()
-> phy_config_inband() // acquires &pl->phydev->lock

whereas all the other call sites where &pl->state_mutex and
&pl->phydev->lock have the locking scheme reversed. Everywhere else,
&pl->phydev->lock is acquired at the top level, and &pl->state_mutex at
the lower level. A clear example is phylink_bringup_phy().

The outlier is the newly introduced phy_config_inband() and the existing
lock order is the correct one. To understand why it cannot be the other
way around, it is sufficient to consider phylink_phy_change(), phylink’s
callback from the PHY device’s phy->phy_link_change() virtual method,
invoked by the PHY state machine.

phy_link_up() and phy_link_down(), the (indirect) callers of
phylink_phy_change(), are called with &phydev->lock acquired.
Then phylink_phy_change() acquires its own &pl->state_mutex, to
serialize changes made to its pl->phy_state and pl->link_config.
So all other instances of &pl->state_mutex and &phydev->lock must be
consistent with this order.

Problem impact
==============

I think the kernel runs a serious deadlock risk if an existing
phylink_resolve() thread, which results in a phy_config_inband() call,
is concurrent with a phy_link_up() or phy_link_down() call, which will
deadlock on &pl->state_mutex in phylink_phy_change(). Practically
speaking, the impact may be limited by the slow speed of the medium
auto-negotiation protocol, which makes it unlikely for the current state
to still be unresolved when a new one is detected, but I think the
problem is there. Nonetheless, the problem was discovered using lockdep.

Proposed solution
=================

Practically speaking, the phy_config_inband() requirement of having
phydev->lock acquired must transfer to the caller (phylink is the only
caller). There, it must bubble up until immediately before
&pl->state_mutex is acquired, for the cases where that takes place.

Solution details, considerations, notes
=======================================

This is the phy_config_inband() call graph:

sfp_upstream_ops :: connect_phy()
|
v
phylink_sfp_connect_phy()
|
v
phylink_sfp_config_phy()
|
| sfp_upstream_ops :: module_insert()
| |
| v
| phylink_sfp_module_insert()
| |
| | sfp_upstream_ops :: module_start()
| | |
| | v
| | phylink_sfp_module_start()
| | |
| v v
| phylink_sfp_config_optical()
phylink_start() | |
| phylink_resume() v v
| | phylink_sfp_set_config()
| | |
v v v
phylink_mac_initial_config()
| phylink_resolve()
| | phylink_ethtool_ksettings_set()
v v v
phylink_major_config()
|
v
phy_config_inband()

phylink_major_config() caller #1, phylink_mac_initial_config(), does not
acquire &pl->state_mutex nor do its callers. It must acquire
&pl->phydev->lock prior to calling phylink_major_config().

phylink_major_config() caller #2, phylink_resolve() acquires
&pl->state_mutex, thus also needs to acquire &pl->phydev->lock.

phylink_major_config() caller #3, phylink_ethtool_ksettings_set(), is
completely uninteresting, because it only call
—truncated—

Related CVE by CWE

No related CWE found.

Top CVE for Vendor

No vendor taxonomy on this entry.

Recently Exploited Similar Vulnerabilities

No recent KEV-listed items for this vendor/product.

How to fix CVE-2025-39915

CVE-2025-39915 is a unknown severity vulnerability affecting the affected product.

Description: In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: phy: transfer phy_config_inband() locking responsibility to phylink Problem description =================== Lockdep reports a possible circular locking dependency (AB/BA) between &pl->state_mutex and &phy->lock, as follows. phylink_resolve() // acquires &pl->state_mutex -> phylink_major_config() -> phy_config_inband() // acquires &pl->phydev->lock whereas all the other call sites where &pl->state_mutex and […]

Exploit Difficulty: HARD
⏱️ Time to exploit: > 4 hours
🛠️ Required skills: Advanced security expertise
💰 Public exploits: Rare or not public

How to Fix:

1 Identify affected systems

- Check if you're running the affected product

2 Immediate actions

- Update to the latest patched version
- If patching is not immediately possible: restrict network exposure, apply least-privilege access

3 Verification

- Test the fix in a staging environment first
- Review logs for signs of exploitation
- Monitor for IOCs (Indicators of Compromise)

4 Long-term prevention

- Enable automatic security updates
- Set up vulnerability monitoring
- Review and harden security configurations

Exploit Difficulty Assessment

HARD
⏱️ Time to Exploit: > 4 hours
🛠️ Skills Required: Advanced security expertise
💰 Public Exploits: Rare or not public

Vulnerability Timeline

Oct 01, 2025
Vulnerability Published

CVE details first published to NVD database

Nov 12, 2025
Imported to Database

Added to this CVE tracking system

Detection Rules & IOCs

No specific detection rules generated for this vulnerability type.

No vendor/product data available.