Vulnerability record · CVE-2025-39905 · published 1 October 2025
CVE-2025-39905: Linux kernel race condition vulnerability
Linux · Linux Kernel
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: phylink: add lock for serializing concurrent pl->phydev writes with resolver Currently phylink_resolve() protects itself against concurrent phylink_bringup_phy() or phylink_disconnect_phy() calls which modify pl->phydev by relying on pl->state_mutex. The problem is that in phylink_resolve(), pl->state_mutex is in a lock inversion state with pl->phydev->lock. So pl->phydev->lock needs to be acquired prior to pl->state_mutex. But that requires dereferencing pl->phydev in the first place, and without pl->state_mutex, that is racy. Hence the reason for the extra lock. Currently it is redundant, but it will serve a functional purpose once mutex_lock(&phy->lock) will be moved outside of the mutex_lock(&pl->state_mutex) section. Another alternative considered would have been to let phylink_resolve() acquire the rtnl_mutex, which is also held when phylink_bringup_phy() and phylink_disconnect_phy() are called. But since phylink_disconnect_phy() runs under rtnl_lock(), it would deadlock with phylink_resolve() when calling flush_work(&pl->resolve). Additionally, it would have been undesirable because it would have unnecessarily blocked many other call paths as well in the entire kernel, so the smaller-scoped lock was preferred.
Description
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: net: phylink: add lock for serializing concurrent pl->phydev writes with resolver Currently phylink_resolve() protects itself against concurrent phylink_bringup_phy() or phylink_disconnect_phy() calls which modify pl->phydev by relying on pl->state_mutex. The problem is that in phylink_resolve(), pl->state_mutex is in a lock inversion state with pl->phydev->lock. So pl->phydev->lock needs to be acquired prior to pl->state_mutex. But that requires dereferencing pl->phydev in the first place, and without pl->state_mutex, that is racy. Hence the reason for the extra lock. Currently it is redundant, but it will serve a functional purpose once mutex_lock(&phy->lock) will be moved outside of the mutex_lock(&pl->state_mutex) section. Another alternative considered would have been to let phylink_resolve() acquire the rtnl_mutex, which is also held when phylink_bringup_phy() and phylink_disconnect_phy() are called. But since phylink_disconnect_phy() runs under rtnl_lock(), it would deadlock with phylink_resolve() when calling flush_work(&pl->resolve). Additionally, it would have been undesirable because it would have unnecessarily blocked many other call paths as well in the entire kernel, so the smaller-scoped lock was preferred.
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:H/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:H/I:H/A:H
Affected products
1 vulnerable configurations from NVD's CPE data, grouped by vendor and product.
References
Track CVE-2025-39905 inside VULONE
Watch it alongside the ransomware crews, C2 infrastructure and forum chatter that reference it, query it through the API and pull it into your SIEM over TAXII.
Related vulnerabilities
Same products first, then exploited flaws of the same weakness class.
Source: NIST National Vulnerability Database (record CVE-2025-39905), CISA KEV, FIRST EPSS (scores of 2026-09-26). This page is refreshed as NVD updates the record.
