In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
gpio: tegra: do not call pinctrl for GPIO direction
tegra_gpio_direction_input() and tegra_gpio_direction_output() already
program the GPIO controller direction registers directly. The additional
pinctrl_gpio_direction_input/output() calls do not add a Tegra pinctrl
operation, because the Tegra pinmux ops provide GPIO request/free
handling but no gpio_set_direction hook.
The extra call still enters the pinctrl core and takes pctldev->mutex.
Shared GPIO users can call the direction path while holding their
per-line spinlock, so this otherwise redundant pinctrl direction call can
sleep in an atomic context.
This was found by our static analysis tool and then confirmed by manual
review of tegra_gpio_probe(), the Tegra GPIO direction callbacks and the
Tegra pinctrl ops. The reviewed path has a default non-sleeping
struct gpio_chip while the direction callback still enters the pinctrl
mutex path.
A directed runtime validation kept the same non-sleeping chip registration
and drove:
gpio_shared_proxy_direction_output()
gpiod_direction_output_raw_commit()
tegra_gpio_direction_output()
pinctrl_gpio_direction_output()
Lockdep reported a sleep-in-atomic warning with the shared GPIO spinlock
held and pinctrl_get_device_gpio_range() plus tegra_gpio_direction_output()
on the stack.
Do not mark the whole chip as can_sleep to paper over this: can_sleep
describes whether get()/set() may sleep, and Tegra value access is MMIO.
Remove the redundant pinctrl direction calls and keep pinctrl involvement
in the existing request/free path.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
- EG Severity
- Not assessed: no CVSS publishedA missing CVSS is not a severity of zero.
- 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
- No SSVC decision: EchelonGraph has not assessed this CVECISA 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 BOD 26-04 block below.
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