In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
drm/sched: Check scheduler work queue before calling timeout handling
During an IGT GPU reset test we see again oops despite of
commit 0c8c901aaaebc9 (drm/sched: Check scheduler ready before calling
timeout handling).
It uses ready condition whether to call drm_sched_fault which unwind
the TDR leads to GPU reset.
However it looks the ready condition is overloaded with other meanings,
for example, for the following stack is related GPU reset :
0 gfx_v9_0_cp_gfx_start
1 gfx_v9_0_cp_gfx_resume
2 gfx_v9_0_cp_resume
3 gfx_v9_0_hw_init
4 gfx_v9_0_resume
5 amdgpu_device_ip_resume_phase2
does the following:
/* start the ring */
gfx_v9_0_cp_gfx_start(adev);
ring->sched.ready = true;
The same approach is for other ASICs as well :
gfx_v8_0_cp_gfx_resume
gfx_v10_0_kiq_resume, etc...
As a result, our GPU reset test causes GPU fault which calls unconditionally gfx_v9_0_fault
and then drm_sched_fault. However now it depends on whether the interrupt service routine
drm_sched_fault is executed after gfx_v9_0_cp_gfx_start is completed which sets the ready
field of the scheduler to true even for uninitialized schedulers and causes oops vs
no fault or when ISR drm_sched_fault is completed prior gfx_v9_0_cp_gfx_start and
NULL pointer dereference does not occur.
Use the field timeout_wq to prevent oops for uninitialized schedulers.
The field could be initialized by the work queue of resetting the domain.
v1: Corrections to commit message (Luben)
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