CVE-2023-54259

Published Dec 30, 2025 Modified Apr 15, 2026

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.

Is your site exposed to CVE-2023-54259?

Run a free security scan — no signup, results in seconds.

References

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.
How do I check if I'm vulnerable to CVE-2023-54259? +
You can use Secably's free Website Scanner to check your website for known vulnerabilities. For infrastructure scanning, use the Port Scanner to identify exposed services that may be affected. Check the vendor advisories linked above for specific patch and version information.

Don't wait for an exploit

Scan your website for vulnerabilities like CVE-2023-54259 — free, no signup required.