In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:
drm/xe: Hold a dma-buf reference for imported BOs
An imported dma-buf BO is created as a ttm_bo_type_sg BO whose
reservation object is the exporter's dma_buf->resv. The importer,
however, only takes a dma-buf reference after a successful
dma_buf_dynamic_attach(). Until then nothing keeps the exporter alive,
so if the exporter is freed while the BO still references its resv, a
later access to that resv is a use-after-free:
Oops: general protection fault, probably for non-canonical address
0x6b6b6b6b6b6b6b9c
Workqueue: ttm ttm_bo_delayed_delete [ttm]
RIP: 0010:mutex_can_spin_on_owner+0x3f/0xc0
This can be reached on two paths:
- dma_buf_dynamic_attach() fails, or
- ttm_bo_init_reserved() fails during BO creation.
In both cases the BO already has bo->base.resv pointing at the exporter
resv, and sg BOs are always torn down via ttm_bo_delayed_delete(), which
locks bo->base.resv asynchronously - potentially after the exporter has
been freed.
Take the dma-buf reference in xe_bo_init_locked(), before
ttm_bo_init_reserved(), so it also covers a creation failure there, and
release it in xe_ttm_bo_destroy(). The reference is held for the whole
BO lifetime, keeping the shared resv alive on every path.
v2:
- Reworked the fix to avoid creating the imported sg BO before
dma_buf_dynamic_attach() succeeds.
- Attach with importer_priv == NULL and make invalidate_mappings ignore
incomplete imports.
v3:
- Dropped the xe-side reordering approach since importer_priv must be
valid when dma_buf_dynamic_attach() publishes the attachment.
- Per Christian's suggestion on the v1 thread, keyed the check on
import_attach rather than removing the sg guard entirely.
- Fixes both xe and amdgpu in a single TTM patch.
v4:
- Moved import_attach check to after dma_resv_copy_fences() so fences
are copied before returning for successful imports (Thomas).
- Removed exporter-alive claim from commit message (Thomas).
v5:
- Add drm/xe patch to keep imported sg BOs off the LRU before attach
succeeds; the TTM fix alone is not sufficient for xe if the BO is
already LRU-visible. (Thomas)
v4 patch:
https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/patch/736663/?series=169129&rev=2
- Patch 1 (drm/ttm) carries Christian's Reviewed-by from v4.
v6:
- Reworked the fix based on Thomas' suggestion. Instead of the TTM resv
individualization (v1-v5) plus the xe off-LRU/placement handling (v5),
just hold a dma-buf reference for the imported BO lifetime so the
shared resv can never be freed while the BO still references it.
Single xe patch, no TTM change. (Thomas)
- Take the reference in xe_bo_init_locked() before ttm_bo_init_reserved()
so a TTM creation failure is covered too (Thomas).
- Dropped the v5 series (drm/ttm + drm/xe off-LRU); the off-LRU approach
also regressed in CI BAT via ttm_bo_pipeline_gutting() creating a ghost
BO that outlived the exporter.
Link to v5: https://patchwork.freedesktop.org/series/169984/
v7:
- Move changelog above --- so it stays in the commit message.
- Reorder changelog entries oldest-to-newest. (Thomas)
(cherry picked from commit 3516f3fae6be35642f8f06f8a218da6425c0306a)
What the EG score is made of (scorer v4.0: the three questions the 0–10 score mixes, published apart · methodology)
The EG score (7.8): severity, escalated by confirmed exploitation. This CVE's 7.8 is its impact severity (EG Severity), not escalated.
- EG Severity
- 7.8 HIGHCVSS-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 2026-10-27). 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 (CISA Vulnrichment) · Automatable no (CISA Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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)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 Vulnrichment) · Technical impact total (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