In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
sched/core: Call wakeup_preempt() for queued tasks during class change
Paul reported recent RCU changes exposed a lost resched where CPU idles
with a rcutorture thread waiting while being completely runnable.
Dumping the rq state at the time of idling with runnable tasks showed
the following:
rq->next_class = &fair_sched_class
rq->nr_running = 1
rq->cfs.h_nr_queued = 0
rq->rt.rt_nr_running = 1
Although the waiting task was an RT task, "rq->next_class" did not point
to rt_sched_class and was stuck at the lower priority fair_sched_class.
Inspecting sched_change_end() revealed the following race with
__sched_setscheduler() for queued, but non-running tasks:
CPU0 CPU1
==== ====
__schedule()
/*
* rq->donor is a fair task that blocks.
* rq->next_class = &fair_sched_class
*/
rq_lock(rq0)
pick_next_task()
/* nr_running = 0 */
pick_task_fair()
sched_balance_newidle()
raw_spin_rq_unlock(rq0)
rq_lock(rq0)
activate_task(rq0, p)
/* p is a fair task */
rq0->nr_running++;
rq0->cfs.h_nr_queued++;
wakeup_preempt(rq, p)
rq->next_class = &fair_sched_class
resched_curr()
rq_unlock(rq0)
__sched_setscheduler(p)
/* p is moved to SCHED_RR */
task_rq_lock(p)
sched_change_begin()
rq0->cfs.h_nr_queued--;
rq0->rt.rt_nr_running++;
sched_change_end()
/*
* p->on_rq = 1 (ctx->queued)
* but p is not rq->donor
* (!ctx->running) hence
* resched_curr() is and
* rq->next_class upgrade is
* skipped.
*/
task_rq_unlock()
raw_spin_rq_lock(rq0)
/*
* rq->nr_running = 1
* rq->cfs.h_nr_queued = 0
* rq->rt.rt_nr_running = 1
* rq->next_class = &fair_sched_class
*/
if (rq->cfs.h_nr_queued && ...)
/* Above is false */
if (rq_modified_above(this_rq, &fair_sched_class))
/* Also false since rq->next_class is still fair */
/*
* sched_balance_newidle() is considered to
* have failed to pull any fair tasks and no
* other wakeups were detected.
*/
return NULL; /* pick_task_fair() */
pick_task_idle()
return rq->idle;
next = rq->idle;
/* Preemption indicators are lost */
clear_tsk_need_resched(prev);
clear_preempt_need_resched();
rq->curr = rq->idle;
!!! rq->idle switches in with rq->running == 1 but !need_resched() !!!
In simple words, enqueue, followed by a class change of the newly queued
task goes unnoticed in rq->next_class indicator and
sched_balance_newidle() sees no fair task, nor any higher priority task
enqueued.
The above sequence will lead to CPU idling with a runnable task on the
CPU.
Call wakeup_preempt() for ctx->queued cases in sched_change_end() to
re-evaluate rq->next_class after class change (ENQUEUE_CLASS) and set
the NEED_RESCHED indicator accordingly.
Newidle balance will correctly see an enqueue of a higher priority
t
---truncated---
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
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS. 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.No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.Each input and its source, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: 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.
No released fix is confirmed on this page, but CISA's timeline does not wait for a fix's release: it starts when an agency identifies the flaw on an asset and updates the CDM Agency and Federal Dashboard, and the directive counts patching, decommissioning the system or another action as remediation. Until a fixed release is applied, mitigate as this page's verdict says. In the directive's words, “Fix on system upgrade” means that, “unless conditions change”, the vulnerability “should be remediated the next time the vulnerable asset receives a scheduled major upgrade or rebuild”: its timelines are “dynamic as facts change”, and a KEV listing shortens them.
The score's inputs: 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