CVE-2025-39726

CVE-2025-39726 is a medium-severity vulnerability in Linux Linux Kernel with a CVSS 3.x base score of 4.7. It is not currently listed as actively exploited by CISA, and its EPSS exploit-prediction score is low. The underlying weakness is classified as CWE-362.

Key facts

Description

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: s390/ism: fix concurrency management in ism_cmd() The s390x ISM device data sheet clearly states that only one request-response sequence is allowable per ISM function at any point in time. Unfortunately as of today the s390/ism driver in Linux does not honor that requirement. This patch aims to rectify that. This problem was discovered based on Aliaksei's bug report which states that for certain workloads the ISM functions end up entering error state (with PEC 2 as seen from the logs) after a while and as a consequence connections handled by the respective function break, and for future connection requests the ISM device is not considered -- given it is in a dysfunctional state. During further debugging PEC 3A was observed as well. A kernel message like [ 1211.244319] zpci: 061a:00:00.0: Event 0x2 reports an error for PCI function 0x61a is a reliable indicator of the stated function entering error state with PEC 2. Let me also point out that a kernel message like [ 1211.244325] zpci: 061a:00:00.0: The ism driver bound to the device does not support error recovery is a reliable indicator that the ISM function won't be auto-recovered because the ISM driver currently lacks support for it. On a technical level, without this synchronization, commands (inputs to the FW) may be partially or fully overwritten (corrupted) by another CPU trying to issue commands on the same function. There is hard evidence that this can lead to DMB token values being used as DMB IOVAs, leading to PEC 2 PCI events indicating invalid DMA. But this is only one of the failure modes imaginable. In theory even completely losing one command and executing another one twice and then trying to interpret the outputs as if the command we intended to execute was actually executed and not the other one is also possible. Frankly, I don't feel confident about providing an exhaustive list of possible consequences.

Frequently asked questions

What is CVE-2025-39726?
In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: s390/ism: fix concurrency management in ism_cmd() The s390x ISM device data sheet clearly states that only one request-response sequence is allowable per ISM function at any point in time. Unfortunately as of today the s390/ism driver in Linux does not honor that requirement. This patch aims to rectify that. This problem was discovered based on Aliaksei's bug report which states that for certain workloads the ISM functions end up entering error state (with PEC 2 as seen from the logs) after a while and as a consequence connections handled by the respective function break, and for future connection requests the ISM device is not considered -- given it is in a dysfunctional state. During further debugging PEC 3A was observed as well. A kernel message like [ 1211.244319] zpci: 061a:00:00.0: Event 0x2 reports an error for PCI function 0x61a is a reliable indicator of the stated function entering error state with PEC 2. Let me also point out that a kernel message like [ 1211.244325] zpci: 061a:00:00.0: The ism driver bound to the device does not support error recovery is a reliable indicator that the ISM function won't be auto-recovered because the ISM driver currently lacks support for it. On a technical level, without this synchronization, commands (inputs to the FW) may be partially or fully overwritten (corrupted) by another CPU trying to issue commands on the same function. There is hard evidence that this can lead to DMB token values being used as DMB IOVAs, leading to PEC 2 PCI events indicating invalid DMA. But this is only one of the failure modes imaginable. In theory even completely losing one command and executing another one twice and then trying to interpret the outputs as if the command we intended to execute was actually executed and not the other one is also possible. Frankly, I don't feel confident about providing an exhaustive list of possible consequences.
How severe is CVE-2025-39726?
CVE-2025-39726 has a CVSS 3.x base score of 4.7, rated medium severity. It is exploitable over local access with high attack complexity, requires low privileges and no user interaction. Impact on confidentiality is none, integrity none, and availability high.
Is CVE-2025-39726 being actively exploited?
It is not currently listed in CISA's KEV catalog. Its EPSS exploit-prediction score is 0% (1st percentile), an estimate of the probability of exploitation in the next 30 days.
What products are affected by CVE-2025-39726?
CVE-2025-39726 primarily affects Linux Linux Kernel. In total, 8 product configurations (CPEs) are listed as vulnerable; see the affected-products list for the exact versions.
How do I fix CVE-2025-39726?
Review the linked vendor and NVD advisories for patched versions and mitigations, then upgrade or apply the recommended workaround.
Does CVE-2025-39726 have an EU (EUVD) identifier?
Yes. CVE-2025-39726 is tracked in the ENISA EU Vulnerability Database (EUVD) as EUVD-2025-33998.
When was CVE-2025-39726 published?
CVE-2025-39726 was published on 2025-09-05 and last updated on 2026-06-17.

References

Affected products (8)

More vulnerabilities in Linux Linux Kernel

All CVEs affecting Linux Linux Kernel →

Other CWE-362 (Race Condition) vulnerabilities

Browse all CWE-362 (Race Condition) vulnerabilities →