CVE-2025-37821 | sched/eevdf: Fix se->slice being set to U64_MAX and resulting crash

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: sched/eevdf: Fix se->slice being set to U64_MAX and resulting crash There is a code path in dequeue_entities() that can set the slice of a sched_entity to U64_MAX, which sometimes results in a crash. The offending case is when dequeue_entities() is called to dequeue a delayed group entity, and then the entity's parent's dequeue is delayed. In that case: 1. In the if (entity_is_task(se)) else block at the beginning of dequeue_entities(), slice is set to cfs_rq_min_slice(group_cfs_rq(se)). If the entity was delayed, then it has no queued tasks, so cfs_rq_min_slice() returns U64_MAX. 2. The first for_each_sched_entity() loop dequeues the entity. 3. If the entity was its parent's only child, then the next iteration tries to dequeue the parent. 4. If the parent's dequeue needs to be delayed, then it breaks from the first for_each_sched_entity() loop _without updating slice_. 5. The second for_each_sched_entity() loop sets the parent's ->slice to the saved slice, which is still U64_MAX. This throws off subsequent calculations with potentially catastrophic results. A manifestation we saw in production was: 6. In update_entity_lag(), se->slice is used to calculate limit, which ends up as a huge negative number. 7. limit is used in se->vlag = clamp(vlag, -limit, limit). Because limit is negative, vlag > limit, so se->vlag is set to the same huge negative number. 8. In place_entity(), se->vlag is scaled, which overflows and results in another huge (positive or negative) number. 9. The adjusted lag is subtracted from se->vruntime, which increases or decreases se->vruntime by a huge number. 10. pick_eevdf() calls entity_eligible()/vruntime_eligible(), which incorrectly returns false because the vruntime is so far from the other vruntimes on the queue, causing the (vruntime - cfs_rq->min_vruntime) * load calulation to overflow. 11. Nothing appears to be eligible, so pick_eevdf() returns NULL. 12. pick_next_entity() tries to dereference the return value of pick_eevdf() and crashes. Dumping the cfs_rq states from the core dumps with drgn showed tell-tale huge vruntime ranges and bogus vlag values, and I also traced se->slice being set to U64_MAX on live systems (which was usually "benign" since the rest of the runqueue needed to be in a particular state to crash). Fix it in dequeue_entities() by always setting slice from the first non-empty cfs_rq.

Published: 2025-05-08 Last update: 2025-11-12 Assigner: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67 Source: 416baaa9-dc9f-4396-8d5f-8c081fb06d67

Conclusion & alert: CVE-2025-37821 is rated Low Risk (28.7/100): CVSS Medium severity, with low exploitation likelihood (EPSS 0.06%). 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-2025-37821

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 2026-03-04 0.02% 0.06% +0.04%
2 2025-05-08 0.02%

Full EPSS history (2 records total)

Common vulnerability scoring system (CVSS) metrics for CVE-2025-37821

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-2025-37821

OS Trackers for CVE-2025-37821

vendor priority summary link
debian unimportant CVE-2025-37821 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-2025-37821
redhat medium https://access.redhat.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-37821
suse medium CVE-2025-37821 severity moderate: SUSE including 94 source package names (cluster-md-kmp-64kb-6.12.0-160000.6.1, cluster-md-kmp-default, …), 463 product×package rows across 84 product lines (Image SLES-Azure-3P, Image SLES-Azure-Basic, … (84 product lines)): Known Not Affected 265, Fixed 177, First Fixed 21. https://www.suse.com/security/cve/CVE-2025-37821/
ubuntu medium CVE-2025-37821 medium priority: Ubuntu including 158 source packages (linux, linux-allwinner-5.19, …), 1551 status rows across 10 suites (bionic, focal, jammy, noble, oracular, plucky, questing, trusty, upstream, xenial): DNE 1145, not-affected 155, ignored 147, released 102, needs-triage 2. https://ubuntu.com/security/CVE-2025-37821

Affected software / configurations for CVE-2025-37821

Vendor Product Version Raw CPE
linux linux_kernel >= 6.12, < 6.12.29 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel >= 6.13, < 6.14.5 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.15 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc1:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.15 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc2:*:*:*:*:*:*
linux linux_kernel 6.15 cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:6.15:rc3:*:*:*:*:*:*

References for CVE-2025-37821

cvelogic Threat Intelligence