In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
drm/amdgpu: drop gfx_v11_0_cp_ecc_error_irq_funcs
The gfx.cp_ecc_error_irq is retired in gfx11. In gfx_v11_0_hw_fini still
use amdgpu_irq_put to disable this interrupt, which caused the call trace
in this function.
[ 102.873958] Call Trace:
[ 102.873959]
[ 102.873961] gfx_v11_0_hw_fini+0x23/0x1e0 [amdgpu]
[ 102.874019] gfx_v11_0_suspend+0xe/0x20 [amdgpu]
[ 102.874072] amdgpu_device_ip_suspend_phase2+0x240/0x460 [amdgpu]
[ 102.874122] amdgpu_device_ip_suspend+0x3d/0x80 [amdgpu]
[ 102.874172] amdgpu_device_pre_asic_reset+0xd9/0x490 [amdgpu]
[ 102.874223] amdgpu_device_gpu_recover.cold+0x548/0xce6 [amdgpu]
[ 102.874321] amdgpu_debugfs_reset_work+0x4c/0x70 [amdgpu]
[ 102.874375] process_one_work+0x21f/0x3f0
[ 102.874377] worker_thread+0x200/0x3e0
[ 102.874378] ? process_one_work+0x3f0/0x3f0
[ 102.874379] kthread+0xfd/0x130
[ 102.874380] ? kthread_complete_and_exit+0x20/0x20
[ 102.874381] ret_from_fork+0x22/0x30
v2:
- Handle umc and gfx ras cases in separated patch
- Retired the gfx_v11_0_cp_ecc_error_irq_funcs in gfx11
v3:
- Improve the subject and code comments
- Add judgment on gfx11 in the function of amdgpu_gfx_ras_late_init
v4:
- Drop the define of CP_ME1_PIPE_INST_ADDR_INTERVAL and
SET_ECC_ME_PIPE_STATE which using in gfx_v11_0_set_cp_ecc_error_state
- Check cp_ecc_error_irq.funcs rather than ip version for a more
sustainable life
v5:
- Simplify judgment conditions
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. 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, and whom BOD 26-04 binds: 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.
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