🛡️ CVE-2024-43834 — kernel

🟡 CVSS 5.5 — Medium ✅ No Known Exploit NVD
5.5
CVSS Score
0 Low4 Medium7 High9 Critical10

Description

xdp: fix invalid wait context of page_pool_destroy()

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

xdp: fix invalid wait context of page_pool_destroy()

If the driver uses a page pool, it creates a page pool with

page_pool_create().

The reference count of page pool is 1 as default.

A page pool will be destroyed only when a reference count reaches 0.

page_pool_destroy() is used to destroy page pool, it decreases a

reference count.

When a page pool is destroyed, ->disconnect() is called, which is

mem_allocator_disconnect().

This function internally acquires mutex_lock().

If the driver uses XDP, it registers a memory model with

xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model().

The xdp_rxq_info_reg_mem_model() internally increases a page pool

reference count if a memory model is a page pool.

Now the reference count is 2.

To destroy a page pool, the driver should call both page_pool_destroy()

and xdp_unreg_mem_model().

The xdp_unreg_mem_model() internally calls page_pool_destroy().

Only page_pool_destroy() decreases a reference count.

If a driver calls page_pool_destroy() then xdp_unreg_mem_model(), we

will face an invalid wait context warning.

Because xdp_unreg_mem_model() calls page_pool_destroy() with

rcu_read_lock().

The page_pool_destroy() internally acquires mutex_lock().

Splat looks like:

=============================

[ BUG: Invalid wait context ]

6.10.0-rc6+ #4 Tainted: G W

-----------------------------

ethtool/1806 is trying to lock:

ffffffff90387b90 (mem_id_lock){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: mem_allocator_disconnect+0x73/0x150

other info that might help us debug this:

context-{5:5}

3 locks held by ethtool/1806:

stack backtrace:

CPU: 0 PID: 1806 Comm: ethtool Tainted: G W 6.10.0-rc6+ #4 f916f41f172891c800f2fed

Hardware name: ASUS System Product Name/PRIME Z690-P D4, BIOS 0603 11/01/2021

Call Trace:

<TASK>

dump_stack_lvl+0x7e/0xc0

__lock_acquire+0x1681/0x4de0

? _printk+0x64/0xe0

? __pfx_mark_lock.part.0+0x10/0x10

? __pfx___lock_acquire+0x10/0x10

lock_acquire+0x1b3/0x580

? mem_allocator_disconnect+0x73/0x150

? __wake_up_klogd.part.0+0x16/0xc0

? __pfx_lock_acquire+0x10/0x10

? dump_stack_lvl+0x91/0xc0

__mutex_lock+0x15c/0x1690

? mem_allocator_disconnect+0x73/0x150

? __pfx_prb_read_valid+0x10/0x10

? mem_allocator_disconnect+0x73/0x150

? __pfx_llist_add_batch+0x10/0x10

? console_unlock+0x193/0x1b0

? lockdep_hardirqs_on+0xbe/0x140

? __pfx___mutex_lock+0x10/0x10

? tick_nohz_tick_stopped+0x16/0x90

? __irq_work_queue_local+0x1e5/0x330

? irq_work_queue+0x39/0x50

? __wake_up_klogd.part.0+0x79/0xc0

? mem_allocator_disconnect+0x73/0x150

mem_allocator_disconnect+0x73/0x150

? __pfx_mem_allocator_disconnect+0x10/0x10

? mark_held_locks+0xa5/0xf0

? rcu_is_watching+0x11/0xb0

page_pool_release+0x36e/0x6d0

page_pool_destroy+0xd7/0x440

xdp_unreg_mem_model+0x1a7/0x2a0

? __pfx_xdp_unreg_mem_model+0x10/0x10

? kfree+0x125/0x370

? bnxt_free_ring.isra.0+0x2eb/0x500

? bnxt_free_mem+0x5ac/0x2500

xdp_rxq_info_unreg+0x4a/0xd0

bnxt_free_mem+0x1356/0x2500

bnxt_close_nic+0xf0/0x3b0

? __pfx_bnxt_close_nic+0x10/0x10

? ethnl_parse_bit+0x2c6/0x6d0

? __pfx___nla_validate_parse+0x10/0x10

? __pfx_ethnl_parse_bit+0x10/0x10

bnxt_set_features+0x2a8/0x3e0

__netdev_update_features+0x4dc/0x1370

? ethnl_parse_bitset+0x4ff/0x750

? __pfx_ethnl_parse_bitset+0x10/0x10

? __pfx___netdev_update_features+0x10/0x10

? mark_held_locks+0xa5/0xf0

? _raw_spin_unlock_irqrestore+0x42/0x70

? __pm_runtime_resume+0x7d/0x110

ethnl_set_features+0x32d/0xa20

To fix this problem, it uses rhashtable_lookup_fast() instead of

rhashtable_lookup() with rcu_read_lock().

Using xa without rcu_read_lock() here is safe.

xa is freed by __xdp_mem_allocator_rcu_free() and this is called by

call_rcu() of mem_xa_remove().

The mem_xa_remove() is called by page_pool_destroy() if a reference

count reaches 0.

The xa is already protected by the reference count mechanism well in the

control plane.

So removing rcu_read_lock() for page_pool_destroy() is safe.

How this vulnerability can be exploited

This issue can be reached with local access to the system, attack complexity is low, an attacker needs low-level privileges on the target. No user interaction is required. The scope is unchanged, so the impact stays within the vulnerable component. Rated impact: confidentiality none, integrity none, availability high.

Affected software

CVE-2024-43834 is recorded against 2 packages.

  • kernel (from 6.7.0 up to 6.10.3)
  • linux-kernel (from 6.7 up to 6.10.3)

Timeline and source

Published on 17 August 2024 and last revised on 15 July 2026. No public exploit is currently recorded for this entry. A vendor advisory or fix has been published. Record sourced from NVD.

References

cert-portal.siemens.com (Web)
git.kernel.org (Web)
git.kernel.org (Web)
git.kernel.org (Web)
git.kernel.org (Web)
git.kernel.org (Web)
git.kernel.org (Web)
lists.debian.org (Web)
lists.debian.org (Web)
github.com (Advisory)
nvd.nist.gov (Advisory)
git.kernel.org (Package)

CVE-2024-43834 on other distributions

Each distribution ships its own build and its own fixed version. Pick the one you run:

Details

Severity Medium
CVSS Score 5.5
CVSS Vector CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H
CWE N/A
Public Exploit ✅ No
Source NVD
Published 2024-08-17
Updated 2026-08-12
Modified 2026-07-15

Affected Packages

Software From version Fixed in
kernel 6.7.0 6.10.3
linux-kernel 6.7 6.10.3

References

Similar Threats

Vulnerability Monitoring

Track new vulnerabilities in kernel

CVE-2024-43834 is rated CVSS 5.5 Medium. BotEraser monitors your WordPress installation and notifies you when software you use appears in our vulnerability database.

Set Up Free Alerts →

No credit card required  ·  Results in minutes

ⓘ Data Notice: The information presented above has been compiled from publicly available internet sources. Boteraser aggregates this data solely for informational purposes and does not independently classify, evaluate, or endorse any findings about the vulnerabilities listed. The accuracy and completeness of this information is the sole responsibility of the original publishers. Boteraser and its operators accept no liability for any decisions made based on this data.