In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
tracing: Restructure trace_clock_global() to never block
It was reported that a fix to the ring buffer recursion detection would
cause a hung machine when performing suspend / resume testing. The
following backtrace was extracted from debugging that case:
Call Trace:
trace_clock_global+0x91/0xa0
__rb_reserve_next+0x237/0x460
ring_buffer_lock_reserve+0x12a/0x3f0
trace_buffer_lock_reserve+0x10/0x50
__trace_graph_return+0x1f/0x80
trace_graph_return+0xb7/0xf0
? trace_clock_global+0x91/0xa0
ftrace_return_to_handler+0x8b/0xf0
? pv_hash+0xa0/0xa0
return_to_handler+0x15/0x30
? ftrace_graph_caller+0xa0/0xa0
? trace_clock_global+0x91/0xa0
? __rb_reserve_next+0x237/0x460
? ring_buffer_lock_reserve+0x12a/0x3f0
? trace_event_buffer_lock_reserve+0x3c/0x120
? trace_event_buffer_reserve+0x6b/0xc0
? trace_event_raw_event_device_pm_callback_start+0x125/0x2d0
? dpm_run_callback+0x3b/0xc0
? pm_ops_is_empty+0x50/0x50
? platform_get_irq_byname_optional+0x90/0x90
? trace_device_pm_callback_start+0x82/0xd0
? dpm_run_callback+0x49/0xc0
With the following RIP:
RIP: 0010:native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x69/0x200
Since the fix to the recursion detection would allow a single recursion to
happen while tracing, this lead to the trace_clock_global() taking a spin
lock and then trying to take it again:
ring_buffer_lock_reserve() {
trace_clock_global() {
arch_spin_lock() {
queued_spin_lock_slowpath() {
/* lock taken */
(something else gets traced by function graph tracer)
ring_buffer_lock_reserve() {
trace_clock_global() {
arch_spin_lock() {
queued_spin_lock_slowpath() {
/* DEAD LOCK! */
Tracing should *never* block, as it can lead to strange lockups like the
above.
Restructure the trace_clock_global() code to instead of simply taking a
lock to update the recorded "prev_time" simply use it, as two events
happening on two different CPUs that calls this at the same time, really
doesn't matter which one goes first. Use a trylock to grab the lock for
updating the prev_time, and if it fails, simply try again the next time.
If it failed to be taken, that means something else is already updating
it.
Bugzilla: https://bugzilla.kernel.org/show_bug.cgi?id=212761
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (5.5): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 5.5 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 5.5 MEDIUMCVSS-B, impact only: no KEV listing, EPSS or EG-KEV tier raises it.GitHub Security Advisory CVSS
- EG Likelihood
- 0.2% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-17). FIRST's exploitation probability, not an EchelonGraph model.
- Confirmed exploitation
- None on record (CISA KEV, EG-KEV Tier 1)Reported apart from the likelihood: an observed fact, not a probability.
- EG Priority
- SSVC Track at medium mission impactTrack at every mission impact level.CISA BOD 26-04: 60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.Each input and its source: the SSVC and BOD 26-04 blocks below.
SSVC (CISA's decision table, applied by EchelonGraph)Track at every mission impact level.
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). All three are CISA's SSVC values (Vulnrichment). EchelonGraph applied CISA's decision table to them; CISA publishes SSVC inputs and the table, not a decision for each CVE. Mission impact is CISA's Mission & Well-being decision point, and only you can judge it. CISA's table makes it high when Mission Prevalence is Essential — the vulnerable component "directly provides capabilities that constitute at least one MEF for at least one entity" (MEF: mission essential function) — or when Public Well-Being Impact is Irreversible: "multiple fatalities are likely", the cyber-physical system "is likely lost or destroyed", "extreme or serious externalities" are imposed on other parties, or social systems such as elections or the financial grid "are destabilized and potentially collapse". CISA's decision table
BOD 26-04 (CISA's remediation timeline, Table 1)60 days if the affected system is publicly exposed; Fix on system upgrade if it is not.
In CISA KEV no (CISA's KEV catalog) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact partial (CISA Vulnrichment). Whether your system is publicly exposed is yours to answer. BOD 26-04 binds US Federal Civilian Executive Branch agencies; for anyone else it is CISA's published timeline, a reference rather than an obligation. The directive · how EchelonGraph applies it