CVE-2023-54259

CVE-2023-54259 is a security vulnerability that is still awaiting full analysis and scoring. It is not currently listed as actively exploited by CISA, and its EPSS exploit-prediction score is low.

Key facts

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: soundwire: bus: Fix unbalanced pm_runtime_put() causing usage count underflow This reverts commit 443a98e649b4 ("soundwire: bus: use pm_runtime_resume_and_get()") Change calls to pm_runtime_resume_and_get() back to pm_runtime_get_sync(). This fixes a usage count underrun caused by doing a pm_runtime_put() even though pm_runtime_resume_and_get() returned an error. The three affected functions ignore -EACCES error from trying to get pm_runtime, and carry on, including a put at the end of the function. But pm_runtime_resume_and_get() does not increment the usage count if it returns an error. So in the -EACCES case you must not call pm_runtime_put(). The documentation for pm_runtime_get_sync() says: "Consider using pm_runtime_resume_and_get() ... as this is likely to result in cleaner code." In this case I don't think it results in cleaner code because the pm_runtime_put() at the end of the function would have to be conditional on the return value from pm_runtime_resume_and_get() at the top of the function. pm_runtime_get_sync() doesn't have this problem because it always increments the count, so always needs a put. The code can just flow through and do the pm_runtime_put() unconditionally.

Frequently asked questions

What is CVE-2023-54259?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: soundwire: bus: Fix unbalanced pm_runtime_put() causing usage count underflow This reverts commit 443a98e649b4 ("soundwire: bus: use pm_runtime_resume_and_get()") Change calls to pm_runtime_resume_and_get() back to pm_runtime_get_sync(). This fixes a usage count underrun caused by doing a pm_runtime_put() even though pm_runtime_resume_and_get() returned an error. The three affected functions ignore -EACCES error from trying to get pm_runtime, and carry on, including a put at the end of the function. But pm_runtime_resume_and_get() does not increment the usage count if it returns an error. So in the -EACCES case you must not call pm_runtime_put(). The documentation for pm_runtime_get_sync() says: "Consider using pm_runtime_resume_and_get() ... as this is likely to result in cleaner code." In this case I don't think it results in cleaner code because the pm_runtime_put() at the end of the function would have to be conditional on the return value from pm_runtime_resume_and_get() at the top of the function. pm_runtime_get_sync() doesn't have this problem because it always increments the count, so always needs a put. The code can just flow through and do the pm_runtime_put() unconditionally.
Is CVE-2023-54259 being actively exploited?
It is not currently listed in CISA's KEV catalog. Its EPSS exploit-prediction score is 0% (6th percentile), an estimate of the probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.
How do I fix CVE-2023-54259?
Review the linked vendor and NVD advisories for patched versions and mitigations, then upgrade or apply the recommended workaround.
Does CVE-2023-54259 have an EU (EUVD) identifier?
Yes. CVE-2023-54259 is tracked in the ENISA EU Vulnerability Database (EUVD) as EUVD-2023-60382.
When was CVE-2023-54259 published?
CVE-2023-54259 was published on 2025-12-30 and last updated on 2026-06-17.

References