In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
jbd2: prevent softlockup in jbd2_log_do_checkpoint()
Both jbd2_log_do_checkpoint() and jbd2_journal_shrink_checkpoint_list()
periodically release j_list_lock after processing a batch of buffers to
avoid long hold times on the j_list_lock. However, since both functions
contend for j_list_lock, the combined time spent waiting and processing
can be significant.
jbd2_journal_shrink_checkpoint_list() explicitly calls cond_resched() when
need_resched() is true to avoid softlockups during prolonged operations.
But jbd2_log_do_checkpoint() only exits its loop when need_resched() is
true, relying on potentially sleeping functions like __flush_batch() or
wait_on_buffer() to trigger rescheduling. If those functions do not sleep,
the kernel may hit a softlockup.
watchdog: BUG: soft lockup - CPU#3 stuck for 156s! [kworker/u129:2:373]
CPU: 3 PID: 373 Comm: kworker/u129:2 Kdump: loaded Not tainted 6.6.0+ #10
Hardware name: Huawei TaiShan 2280 /BC11SPCD, BIOS 1.27 06/13/2017
Workqueue: writeback wb_workfn (flush-7:2)
pstate: 20000005 (nzCv daif -PAN -UAO -TCO -DIT -SSBS BTYPE=--)
pc : native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x358/0x418
lr : jbd2_log_do_checkpoint+0x31c/0x438 [jbd2]
Call trace:
native_queued_spin_lock_slowpath+0x358/0x418
jbd2_log_do_checkpoint+0x31c/0x438 [jbd2]
__jbd2_log_wait_for_space+0xfc/0x2f8 [jbd2]
add_transaction_credits+0x3bc/0x418 [jbd2]
start_this_handle+0xf8/0x560 [jbd2]
jbd2__journal_start+0x118/0x228 [jbd2]
__ext4_journal_start_sb+0x110/0x188 [ext4]
ext4_do_writepages+0x3dc/0x740 [ext4]
ext4_writepages+0xa4/0x190 [ext4]
do_writepages+0x94/0x228
__writeback_single_inode+0x48/0x318
writeback_sb_inodes+0x204/0x590
__writeback_inodes_wb+0x54/0xf8
wb_writeback+0x2cc/0x3d8
wb_do_writeback+0x2e0/0x2f8
wb_workfn+0x80/0x2a8
process_one_work+0x178/0x3e8
worker_thread+0x234/0x3b8
kthread+0xf0/0x108
ret_from_fork+0x10/0x20
So explicitly call cond_resched() in jbd2_log_do_checkpoint() to avoid
softlockup.
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
- 0.1% within 30 daysSource: FIRST EPSS (model v2026.06.15, score date 2026-10-24). 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