In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
mm: slub: avoid wake up kswapd in set_track_prepare
set_track_prepare() can incur lock recursion.
The issue is that it is called from hrtimer_start_range_ns
holding the per_cpu(hrtimer_bases)[n].lock, but when enabled
CONFIG_DEBUG_OBJECTS_TIMERS, may wake up kswapd in set_track_prepare,
and try to hold the per_cpu(hrtimer_bases)[n].lock.
Avoid deadlock caused by implicitly waking up kswapd by passing in
allocation flags, which do not contain __GFP_KSWAPD_RECLAIM in the
debug_objects_fill_pool() case. Inside stack depot they are processed by
gfp_nested_mask().
Since ___slab_alloc() has preemption disabled, we mask out
__GFP_DIRECT_RECLAIM from the flags there.
The oops looks something like:
BUG: spinlock recursion on CPU#3, swapper/3/0
lock: 0xffffff8a4bf29c80, .magic: dead4ead, .owner: swapper/3/0, .owner_cpu: 3
Hardware name: Qualcomm Technologies, Inc. Popsicle based on SM8850 (DT)
Call trace:
spin_bug+0x0
_raw_spin_lock_irqsave+0x80
hrtimer_try_to_cancel+0x94
task_contending+0x10c
enqueue_dl_entity+0x2a4
dl_server_start+0x74
enqueue_task_fair+0x568
enqueue_task+0xac
do_activate_task+0x14c
ttwu_do_activate+0xcc
try_to_wake_up+0x6c8
default_wake_function+0x20
autoremove_wake_function+0x1c
__wake_up+0xac
wakeup_kswapd+0x19c
wake_all_kswapds+0x78
__alloc_pages_slowpath+0x1ac
__alloc_pages_noprof+0x298
stack_depot_save_flags+0x6b0
stack_depot_save+0x14
set_track_prepare+0x5c
___slab_alloc+0xccc
__kmalloc_cache_noprof+0x470
__set_page_owner+0x2bc
post_alloc_hook[jt]+0x1b8
prep_new_page+0x28
get_page_from_freelist+0x1edc
__alloc_pages_noprof+0x13c
alloc_slab_page+0x244
allocate_slab+0x7c
___slab_alloc+0x8e8
kmem_cache_alloc_noprof+0x450
debug_objects_fill_pool+0x22c
debug_object_activate+0x40
enqueue_hrtimer[jt]+0xdc
hrtimer_start_range_ns+0x5f8
...
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
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). 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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).CISA BOD 26-04: 14 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 low or medium mission impact; Track* at high (mission-essential systems).
A fix is available. Apply it within your standard update timelines.
Exploitation none (no CISA value, KEV listing or exploit code on record) · Automatable no (CISA's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). EchelonGraph holds no SSVC assessment of this CVE from CISA: none of these inputs is from 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)14 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's BOD 26-04 default) · Technical impact total (CISA's BOD 26-04 default). Where an input reads “CISA's BOD 26-04 default”, no one has published it for this CVE, and CISA's implementation guidance says: “If “Automatable” and “Technical Impact” information items about a CVE ID are not available and the CVE ID is not in the KEV Catalog, CISA will treat its values as “no” and “total,” respectively, until CISA or a third party provides metadata about the CVE ID. CISA will always provide the Vulnrichment data for a CVE ID listed in the KEV Catalog.” 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