In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
nvme-pci: fix race condition between reset and nvme_dev_disable()
nvme_dev_disable() modifies the dev->online_queues field, therefore
nvme_pci_update_nr_queues() should avoid racing against it, otherwise
we could end up passing invalid values to blk_mq_update_nr_hw_queues().
WARNING: CPU: 39 PID: 61303 at drivers/pci/msi/api.c:347
pci_irq_get_affinity+0x187/0x210
Workqueue: nvme-reset-wq nvme_reset_work [nvme]
RIP: 0010:pci_irq_get_affinity+0x187/0x210
Call Trace:
? blk_mq_pci_map_queues+0x87/0x3c0
? pci_irq_get_affinity+0x187/0x210
blk_mq_pci_map_queues+0x87/0x3c0
nvme_pci_map_queues+0x189/0x460 [nvme]
blk_mq_update_nr_hw_queues+0x2a/0x40
nvme_reset_work+0x1be/0x2a0 [nvme]
Fix the bug by locking the shutdown_lock mutex before using
dev->online_queues. Give up if nvme_dev_disable() is running or if
it has been executed already.
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (4.7): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 4.7 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 4.7 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 2026-10-29). 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