<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Fri, 02 Oct 2026 21:41:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2025-38632 — pinmux: fix race causing mux_owner NULL with active mux_usecount</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-38632</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;pinmux: fix race causing mux_owner NULL with active mux_usecount&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;commit 5a3e85c3c397 (&amp;#34;pinmux: Use sequential access to access
desc-&amp;gt;pinmux data&amp;#34;) tried to address the issue when two client of the
same gpio calls pinctrl_select_state() for the same functionality, was
resulting in NULL pointer issue while accessing desc-&amp;gt;mux_owner.
However, issue was not completely fixed due to the way it was handled
and it can still result in the same NULL pointer.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The issue occurs due to the following interleaving:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;cpu0 (process A)                   cpu1 (process B)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;pin_request() {                   pin_free() {&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;mutex_lock()
                                         desc-&amp;gt;mux_usecount--; //becomes 0
                                         ..
                                         mutex_unlock()&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;mutex_lock(desc-&amp;gt;mux)
  desc-&amp;gt;mux_usecount++; // becomes 1
  desc-&amp;gt;mux_owner = owner;
  mutex_unlock(desc-&amp;gt;mux)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;mutex_lock(desc-&amp;gt;mux)
                                         desc-&amp;gt;mux_owner = NULL;
                                         mutex_unlock(desc-&amp;gt;mux)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This sequence leads to a state where the pin appears to be in use
(`mux_usecount == 1`) but has no owner (`mux_owner == NULL`), which can
cause NULL pointer on next pin_request on the same pin.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Ensure that updates to mux_usecount and mux_owner are performed
atomically u…&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;pinmux: fix race causing mux_owner NULL with active mux_usecount&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;commit 5a3e85c3c397 (&amp;#34;pinmux: Use sequential access to access
desc-&amp;gt;pinmux data&amp;#34;) tried to address the issue when two client of the
same gpio calls pinctrl_select_state() for the same functionality, was
resulting in NULL pointer issue while accessing desc-&amp;gt;mux_owner.
However, issue was not completely fixed due to the way it was handled
and it can still result in the same NULL pointer.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The issue occurs due to the following interleaving:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;cpu0 (process A)                   cpu1 (process B)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;pin_request() {                   pin_free() {&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;mutex_lock()
                                         desc-&amp;gt;mux_usecount--; //becomes 0
                                         ..
                                         mutex_unlock()&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;mutex_lock(desc-&amp;gt;mux)
  desc-&amp;gt;mux_usecount++; // becomes 1
  desc-&amp;gt;mux_owner = owner;
  mutex_unlock(desc-&amp;gt;mux)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;mutex_lock(desc-&amp;gt;mux)
                                         desc-&amp;gt;mux_owner = NULL;
                                         mutex_unlock(desc-&amp;gt;mux)&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;This sequence leads to a state where the pin appears to be in use
(`mux_usecount == 1`) but has no owner (`mux_owner == NULL`), which can
cause NULL pointer on next pin_request on the same pin.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Ensure that updates to mux_usecount and mux_owner are performed
atomically u…&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2025-38632</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
