In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
dmaengine: idxd: Let probe fail when workqueue cannot be enabled
The workqueue is enabled when the appropriate driver is loaded and
disabled when the driver is removed. When the driver is removed it
assumes that the workqueue was enabled successfully and proceeds to
free allocations made during workqueue enabling.
Failure during workqueue enabling does not prevent the driver from
being loaded. This is because the error path within drv_enable_wq()
returns success unless a second failure is encountered
during the error path. By returning success it is possible to load
the driver even if the workqueue cannot be enabled and
allocations that do not exist are attempted to be freed during
driver remove.
Some examples of problematic flows:
(a)
idxd_dmaengine_drv_probe() -> drv_enable_wq() -> idxd_wq_request_irq():
In above flow, if idxd_wq_request_irq() fails then
idxd_wq_unmap_portal() is called on error exit path, but
drv_enable_wq() returns 0 because idxd_wq_disable() succeeds. The
driver is thus loaded successfully.
idxd_dmaengine_drv_remove()->drv_disable_wq()->idxd_wq_unmap_portal()
Above flow on driver unload triggers the WARN in devm_iounmap() because
the device resource has already been removed during error path of
drv_enable_wq().
(b)
idxd_dmaengine_drv_probe() -> drv_enable_wq() -> idxd_wq_request_irq():
In above flow, if idxd_wq_request_irq() fails then
idxd_wq_init_percpu_ref() is never called to initialize the percpu
counter, yet the driver loads successfully because drv_enable_wq()
returns 0.
idxd_dmaengine_drv_remove()->__idxd_wq_quiesce()->percpu_ref_kill():
Above flow on driver unload triggers a BUG when attempting to drop the
initial ref of the uninitialized percpu ref:
BUG: kernel NULL pointer dereference, address: 0000000000000010
Fix the drv_enable_wq() error path by returning the original error that
indicates failure of workqueue enabling. This ensures that the probe
fails when an error is encountered and the driver remove paths are only
attempted when the workqueue was enabled successfully.
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 2026-10-25). 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, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: 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.
The score's inputs: 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