CVE-2025-21880 | drm/xe/userptr: fix EFAULT handling

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: drm/xe/userptr: fix EFAULT handling Currently we treat EFAULT from hmm_range_fault() as a non-fatal error when called from xe_vm_userptr_pin() with the idea that we want to avoid killing the entire vm and chucking an error, under the assumption that the user just did an unmap or something, and has no intention of actually touching that memory from the GPU. At this point we have already zapped the PTEs so any access should generate a page fault, and if the pin fails there also it will then become fatal. However it looks like it's possible for the userptr vma to still be on the rebind list in preempt_rebind_work_func(), if we had to retry the pin again due to something happening in the caller before we did the rebind step, but in the meantime needing to re-validate the userptr and this time hitting the EFAULT. This explains an internal user report of hitting: [ 191.738349] WARNING: CPU: 1 PID: 157 at drivers/gpu/drm/xe/xe_res_cursor.h:158 xe_pt_stage_bind.constprop.0+0x60a/0x6b0 [xe] [ 191.738551] Workqueue: xe-ordered-wq preempt_rebind_work_func [xe] [ 191.738616] RIP: 0010:xe_pt_stage_bind.constprop.0+0x60a/0x6b0 [xe] [ 191.738690] Call Trace: [ 191.738692] <TASK> [ 191.738694] ? show_regs+0x69/0x80 [ 191.738698] ? __warn+0x93/0x1a0 [ 191.738703] ? xe_pt_stage_bind.constprop.0+0x60a/0x6b0 [xe] [ 191.738759] ? report_bug+0x18f/0x1a0 [ 191.738764] ? handle_bug+0x63/0xa0 [ 191.738767] ? exc_invalid_op+0x19/0x70 [ 191.738770] ? asm_exc_invalid_op+0x1b/0x20 [ 191.738777] ? xe_pt_stage_bind.constprop.0+0x60a/0x6b0 [xe] [ 191.738834] ? ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 [ 191.738849] bind_op_prepare+0x105/0x7b0 [xe] [ 191.738906] ? dma_resv_reserve_fences+0x301/0x380 [ 191.738912] xe_pt_update_ops_prepare+0x28c/0x4b0 [xe] [ 191.738966] ? kmemleak_alloc+0x4b/0x80 [ 191.738973] ops_execute+0x188/0x9d0 [xe] [ 191.739036] xe_vm_rebind+0x4ce/0x5a0 [xe] [ 191.739098] ? trace_hardirqs_on+0x4d/0x60 [ 191.739112] preempt_rebind_work_func+0x76f/0xd00 [xe] Followed by NPD, when running some workload, since the sg was never actually populated but the vma is still marked for rebind when it should be skipped for this special EFAULT case. This is confirmed to fix the user report. v2 (MattB): - Move earlier. v3 (MattB): - Update the commit message to make it clear that this indeed fixes the issue. (cherry picked from commit 6b93cb98910c826c2e2004942f8b060311e43618)

Published: 2025-03-27 Last update: 2025-10-30 Assigner: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67 Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

Conclusion & alert: CVE-2025-21880 is rated Low Risk (22.7/100): CVSS Medium severity, with low exploitation likelihood (EPSS 0.02%). Mandatory action: Monitor for updates and reassess as exploit intelligence or EPSS changes.

Risk is dynamic; we continuously reassess and refresh what is shown on this page as upstream context changes.

Exploit prediction scoring system (EPSS) score for CVE-2025-21880

EPSS lead: Daily EPSS estimates relative likelihood of exploitation; percentile ranks this CVE among scored vulnerabilities (higher = more severe relative rank).

# Date Old EPSS score New EPSS score Delta (New - Old)
1 2025-03-28 0.02%

Full EPSS history (1 record total)

Common vulnerability scoring system (CVSS) metrics for CVE-2025-21880

CVSS metrics for this CVE.

Base score Version Severity Vector Exploitability Impact Score source
5.5 3.1 MEDIUM
CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H Click to expand
Attack vector (AV:L)
They already need access on the box, or another person has to do something wrong; it’s not a remote drive-by.
Attack complexity (AC:L)
Once they can reach the bug, pulling it off is straightforward—no weird race conditions or rare setup.
Privileges required (PR:L)
A normal user session is enough; they don’t have to be admin.
User interaction (UI:N)
Nobody has to click “OK” or open a trap file; it can work without a victim helping.
Scope (S:U)
Damage stays in the same “trust bubble” as the broken component—no big spill into unrelated systems.
Confidentiality (C:N)
Doesn’t really leak secrets in a meaningful way.
Integrity (I:N)
Data isn’t meaningfully altered or forged.
Availability (A:H)
Could take the service down hard or make it unusable for people who depend on it.
1.8 3.6 [email protected]

Weakness enumeration for CVE-2025-21880

OS Trackers for CVE-2025-21880

vendor priority summary link
debian unimportant CVE-2025-21880 unimportant priority: Debian including 1 source packages (linux), 5 status rows across 5 suites (bookworm, bullseye, forky, sid, trixie): resolved 5. https://security-tracker.debian.org/tracker/CVE-2025-21880
redhat low https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-21880
suse medium https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-21880/
ubuntu medium CVE-2025-21880 medium priority: Ubuntu including 150 source packages (linux, linux-allwinner-5.19, …), 1487 status rows across 10 suites (bionic, focal, jammy, noble, oracular, plucky, questing, trusty, upstream, xenial): DNE 1097, ignored 165, released 115, not-affected 110. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2025-21880

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2025-21880

Vendor Product Version Raw CPE
linux linux_kernel >= 6.10, < 6.12.18 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.13, < 6.13.6 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.14 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.14:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.14 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.14:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.14 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.14:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.14 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.14:rc4:*:*:*:*:*:*

References for CVE-2025-21880

cvelogic Threat Intelligence