CVE-2025-21674

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

net/mlx5e: Fix inversion dependency warning while enabling IPsec tunnel

Attempt to enable IPsec packet offload in tunnel mode in debug kernel
generates the following kernel panic, which is happening due to two
issues:
1. In SA add section, the should be _bh() variant when marking SA mode.
2. There is not needed flush_workqueue in SA delete routine. It is not
needed as at this stage as it is removed from SADB and the running work
will be canceled later in SA free.

 =====================================================
 WARNING: SOFTIRQ-safe -> SOFTIRQ-unsafe lock order detected
 6.12.0+ #4 Not tainted
 -----------------------------------------------------
 charon/1337 [HC0[0]:SC0[4]:HE1:SE0] is trying to acquire:
 ffff88810f365020 (&xa->xa_lock#24){+.+.}-{3:3}, at: mlx5e_xfrm_del_state+0xca/0x1e0 [mlx5_core]

 and this task is already holding:
 ffff88813e0f0d48 (&x->lock){+.-.}-{3:3}, at: xfrm_state_delete+0x16/0x30
 which would create a new lock dependency:
  (&x->lock){+.-.}-{3:3} -> (&xa->xa_lock#24){+.+.}-{3:3}

 but this new dependency connects a SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock:
  (&x->lock){+.-.}-{3:3}

 ... which became SOFTIRQ-irq-safe at:
   lock_acquire+0x1be/0x520
   _raw_spin_lock_bh+0x34/0x40
   xfrm_timer_handler+0x91/0xd70
   __hrtimer_run_queues+0x1dd/0xa60
   hrtimer_run_softirq+0x146/0x2e0
   handle_softirqs+0x266/0x860
   irq_exit_rcu+0x115/0x1a0
   sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x6e/0x90
   asm_sysvec_apic_timer_interrupt+0x16/0x20
   default_idle+0x13/0x20
   default_idle_call+0x67/0xa0
   do_idle+0x2da/0x320
   cpu_startup_entry+0x50/0x60
   start_secondary+0x213/0x2a0
   common_startup_64+0x129/0x138

 to a SOFTIRQ-irq-unsafe lock:
  (&xa->xa_lock#24){+.+.}-{3:3}

 ... which became SOFTIRQ-irq-unsafe at:
 ...
   lock_acquire+0x1be/0x520
   _raw_spin_lock+0x2c/0x40
   xa_set_mark+0x70/0x110
   mlx5e_xfrm_add_state+0xe48/0x2290 [mlx5_core]
   xfrm_dev_state_add+0x3bb/0xd70
   xfrm_add_sa+0x2451/0x4a90
   xfrm_user_rcv_msg+0x493/0x880
   netlink_rcv_skb+0x12e/0x380
   xfrm_netlink_rcv+0x6d/0x90
   netlink_unicast+0x42f/0x740
   netlink_sendmsg+0x745/0xbe0
   __sock_sendmsg+0xc5/0x190
   __sys_sendto+0x1fe/0x2c0
   __x64_sys_sendto+0xdc/0x1b0
   do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x140
   entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53

 other info that might help us debug this:

  Possible interrupt unsafe locking scenario:

        CPU0                    CPU1
        ----                    ----
   lock(&xa->xa_lock#24);
                                local_irq_disable();
                                lock(&x->lock);
                                lock(&xa->xa_lock#24);
   <Interrupt>
     lock(&x->lock);

  *** DEADLOCK ***

 2 locks held by charon/1337:
  #0: ffffffff87f8f858 (&net->xfrm.xfrm_cfg_mutex){+.+.}-{4:4}, at: xfrm_netlink_rcv+0x5e/0x90
  #1: ffff88813e0f0d48 (&x->lock){+.-.}-{3:3}, at: xfrm_state_delete+0x16/0x30

 the dependencies between SOFTIRQ-irq-safe lock and the holding lock:
 -> (&x->lock){+.-.}-{3:3} ops: 29 {
    HARDIRQ-ON-W at:
                     lock_acquire+0x1be/0x520
                     _raw_spin_lock_bh+0x34/0x40
                     xfrm_alloc_spi+0xc0/0xe60
                     xfrm_alloc_userspi+0x5f6/0xbc0
                     xfrm_user_rcv_msg+0x493/0x880
                     netlink_rcv_skb+0x12e/0x380
                     xfrm_netlink_rcv+0x6d/0x90
                     netlink_unicast+0x42f/0x740
                     netlink_sendmsg+0x745/0xbe0
                     __sock_sendmsg+0xc5/0x190
                     __sys_sendto+0x1fe/0x2c0
                     __x64_sys_sendto+0xdc/0x1b0
                     do_syscall_64+0x6d/0x140
                     entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x4b/0x53
    IN-SOFTIRQ-W at:
                     lock_acquire+0x1be/0x520
                     _raw_spin_lock_bh+0x34/0x40
                     xfrm_timer_handler+0x91/0xd70
                     __hrtimer_run_queues+0x1dd/0xa60
   
---truncated---