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

ftrace: Fix recursive locking direct_mutex in ftrace_modify_direct_caller

Naveen reported recursive locking of direct_mutex with sample
ftrace-direct-modify.ko:

[ 74.762406] WARNING: possible recursive locking detected
[ 74.762887] 6.0.0-rc6+ #33 Not tainted
[ 74.763216] --------------------------------------------
[ 74.763672] event-sample-fn/1084 is trying to acquire lock:
[ 74.764152] ffffffff86c9d6b0 (direct_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: \
register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180
[ 74.764922]
[ 74.764922] but task is already holding lock:
[ 74.765421] ffffffff86c9d6b0 (direct_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: \
modify_ftrace_direct+0x34/0x1f0
[ 74.766142]
[ 74.766142] other info that might help us debug this:
[ 74.766701] Possible unsafe locking scenario:
[ 74.766701]
[ 74.767216] CPU0
[ 74.767437] ----
[ 74.767656] lock(direct_mutex);
[ 74.767952] lock(direct_mutex);
[ 74.768245]
[ 74.768245] *** DEADLOCK ***
[ 74.768245]
[ 74.768750] May be due to missing lock nesting notation
[ 74.768750]
[ 74.769332] 1 lock held by event-sample-fn/1084:
[ 74.769731] #0: ffffffff86c9d6b0 (direct_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: \
modify_ftrace_direct+0x34/0x1f0
[ 74.770496]
[ 74.770496] stack backtrace:
[ 74.770884] CPU: 4 PID: 1084 Comm: event-sample-fn Not tainted ...
[ 74.771498] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), ...
[ 74.772474] Call Trace:
[ 74.772696] <TASK>
[ 74.772896] dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x5b
[ 74.773223] __lock_acquire.cold.74+0xac/0x2b7
[ 74.773616] lock_acquire+0xd2/0x310
[ 74.773936] ? register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180
[ 74.774357] ? lock_is_held_type+0xd8/0x130
[ 74.774744] ? my_tramp2+0x11/0x11 [ftrace_direct_modify]
[ 74.775213] __mutex_lock+0x99/0x1010
[ 74.775536] ? register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180
[ 74.775954] ? slab_free_freelist_hook.isra.43+0x115/0x160
[ 74.776424] ? ftrace_set_hash+0x195/0x220
[ 74.776779] ? register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180
[ 74.777194] ? kfree+0x3e1/0x440
[ 74.777482] ? my_tramp2+0x11/0x11 [ftrace_direct_modify]
[ 74.777941] ? __schedule+0xb40/0xb40
[ 74.778258] ? register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180
[ 74.778672] ? my_tramp1+0xf/0xf [ftrace_direct_modify]
[ 74.779128] register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180
[ 74.779527] ? ftrace_set_filter_ip+0x33/0x70
[ 74.779910] ? __schedule+0xb40/0xb40
[ 74.780231] ? my_tramp1+0xf/0xf [ftrace_direct_modify]
[ 74.780678] ? my_tramp2+0x11/0x11 [ftrace_direct_modify]
[ 74.781147] ftrace_modify_direct_caller+0x5b/0x90
[ 74.781563] ? 0xffffffffa0201000
[ 74.781859] ? my_tramp1+0xf/0xf [ftrace_direct_modify]
[ 74.782309] modify_ftrace_direct+0x1b2/0x1f0
[ 74.782690] ? __schedule+0xb40/0xb40
[ 74.783014] ? simple_thread+0x2a/0xb0 [ftrace_direct_modify]
[ 74.783508] ? __schedule+0xb40/0xb40
[ 74.783832] ? my_tramp2+0x11/0x11 [ftrace_direct_modify]
[ 74.784294] simple_thread+0x76/0xb0 [ftrace_direct_modify]
[ 74.784766] kthread+0xf5/0x120
[ 74.785052] ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20
[ 74.785464] ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30
[ 74.785781] </TASK>

Fix this by using register_ftrace_function_nolock in
ftrace_modify_direct_caller.
Published: 2025-12-09
Score: 5.5 Medium
EPSS: < 1% Very Low
KEV: No
Impact: n/a
Action: n/a
AI Analysis

Analysis and contextual insights are available on OpenCVE Cloud.

Remediation

No vendor fix or workaround currently provided.

Additional remediation guidance may be available on OpenCVE Cloud.

Tracking

Sign in to view the affected projects.

Advisories

No advisories yet.

History

Wed, 10 Dec 2025 12:15:00 +0000

Type Values Removed Values Added
References
Metrics threat_severity

None

 cvssV3_1

{'score': 5.5, 'vector': 'CVSS:3.1/AV:L/AC:L/PR:L/UI:N/S:U/C:N/I:N/A:H'}

threat_severity

Low

Tue, 09 Dec 2025 00:30:00 +0000

Type Values Removed Values Added
Description In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: ftrace: Fix recursive locking direct_mutex in ftrace_modify_direct_caller Naveen reported recursive locking of direct_mutex with sample ftrace-direct-modify.ko: [ 74.762406] WARNING: possible recursive locking detected [ 74.762887] 6.0.0-rc6+ #33 Not tainted [ 74.763216] -------------------------------------------- [ 74.763672] event-sample-fn/1084 is trying to acquire lock: [ 74.764152] ffffffff86c9d6b0 (direct_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: \ register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180 [ 74.764922] [ 74.764922] but task is already holding lock: [ 74.765421] ffffffff86c9d6b0 (direct_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: \ modify_ftrace_direct+0x34/0x1f0 [ 74.766142] [ 74.766142] other info that might help us debug this: [ 74.766701] Possible unsafe locking scenario: [ 74.766701] [ 74.767216] CPU0 [ 74.767437] ---- [ 74.767656] lock(direct_mutex); [ 74.767952] lock(direct_mutex); [ 74.768245] [ 74.768245] *** DEADLOCK *** [ 74.768245] [ 74.768750] May be due to missing lock nesting notation [ 74.768750] [ 74.769332] 1 lock held by event-sample-fn/1084: [ 74.769731] #0: ffffffff86c9d6b0 (direct_mutex){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: \ modify_ftrace_direct+0x34/0x1f0 [ 74.770496] [ 74.770496] stack backtrace: [ 74.770884] CPU: 4 PID: 1084 Comm: event-sample-fn Not tainted ... [ 74.771498] Hardware name: QEMU Standard PC (i440FX + PIIX, 1996), ... [ 74.772474] Call Trace: [ 74.772696] <TASK> [ 74.772896] dump_stack_lvl+0x44/0x5b [ 74.773223] __lock_acquire.cold.74+0xac/0x2b7 [ 74.773616] lock_acquire+0xd2/0x310 [ 74.773936] ? register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180 [ 74.774357] ? lock_is_held_type+0xd8/0x130 [ 74.774744] ? my_tramp2+0x11/0x11 [ftrace_direct_modify] [ 74.775213] __mutex_lock+0x99/0x1010 [ 74.775536] ? register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180 [ 74.775954] ? slab_free_freelist_hook.isra.43+0x115/0x160 [ 74.776424] ? ftrace_set_hash+0x195/0x220 [ 74.776779] ? register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180 [ 74.777194] ? kfree+0x3e1/0x440 [ 74.777482] ? my_tramp2+0x11/0x11 [ftrace_direct_modify] [ 74.777941] ? __schedule+0xb40/0xb40 [ 74.778258] ? register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180 [ 74.778672] ? my_tramp1+0xf/0xf [ftrace_direct_modify] [ 74.779128] register_ftrace_function+0x1f/0x180 [ 74.779527] ? ftrace_set_filter_ip+0x33/0x70 [ 74.779910] ? __schedule+0xb40/0xb40 [ 74.780231] ? my_tramp1+0xf/0xf [ftrace_direct_modify] [ 74.780678] ? my_tramp2+0x11/0x11 [ftrace_direct_modify] [ 74.781147] ftrace_modify_direct_caller+0x5b/0x90 [ 74.781563] ? 0xffffffffa0201000 [ 74.781859] ? my_tramp1+0xf/0xf [ftrace_direct_modify] [ 74.782309] modify_ftrace_direct+0x1b2/0x1f0 [ 74.782690] ? __schedule+0xb40/0xb40 [ 74.783014] ? simple_thread+0x2a/0xb0 [ftrace_direct_modify] [ 74.783508] ? __schedule+0xb40/0xb40 [ 74.783832] ? my_tramp2+0x11/0x11 [ftrace_direct_modify] [ 74.784294] simple_thread+0x76/0xb0 [ftrace_direct_modify] [ 74.784766] kthread+0xf5/0x120 [ 74.785052] ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20 [ 74.785464] ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30 [ 74.785781] </TASK> Fix this by using register_ftrace_function_nolock in ftrace_modify_direct_caller.
Title ftrace: Fix recursive locking direct_mutex in ftrace_modify_direct_caller
First Time appeared Linux
Linux linux Kernel
CPEs cpe:2.3:o:linux:linux_kernel:*:*:*:*:*:*:*:*
Vendors & Products Linux
Linux linux Kernel
References

Subscriptions

Linux Linux Kernel
cve-icon MITRE

Status: PUBLISHED

Assigner: Linux

Published:

Updated: 2026-05-11T19:22:54.742Z

Reserved: 2025-12-08T23:57:43.371Z

Link: CVE-2022-50648

cve-icon Vulnrichment

No data.

cve-icon NVD

Status : Deferred

Published: 2025-12-09T01:16:47.490

Modified: 2026-04-15T00:35:42.020

Link: CVE-2022-50648

cve-icon Redhat

Severity : Low

Publid Date: 2025-12-09T00:00:00Z

Links: CVE-2022-50648 - Bugzilla

cve-icon OpenCVE Enrichment

No data.

Weaknesses

No weakness.