In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
tty: serial: samsung: Remove redundant port lock acquisition in rx helpers
Sashiko identified a deadlock when the console flow is engaged [1].
When console flow control is enabled (UPF_CONS_FLOW),
s3c24xx_serial_stop_tx() calls s3c24xx_serial_rx_enable() and
s3c24xx_serial_start_tx() calls s3c24xx_serial_rx_disable().
The serial core framework invokes the .stop_tx() and .start_tx()
callbacks with the port->lock spinlock already held. Furthermore, all
internal driver paths that invoke stop_tx (such as the DMA TX
completion handler s3c24xx_serial_tx_dma_complete() or the PIO TX IRQ
handler s3c24xx_serial_tx_irq()) also acquire port->lock prior to
calling it. (Note that s3c24xx_serial_start_tx() is only invoked by the
serial core).
However, s3c24xx_serial_rx_enable() and s3c24xx_serial_rx_disable()
unconditionally attempt to acquire port->lock again using
uart_port_lock_irqsave(). Since spinlocks are not recursive, this
causes a deadlock on the same CPU when console flow control is engaged.
Remove the redundant lock acquisition from both rx helper functions.
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
- 0.2% 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
- 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.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.
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