<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
  <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/rss/recent/all/10</id>
  <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
  <updated>2026-10-01T16:27:30.143513+00:00</updated>
  <author>
    <name>Vulnerability-Lookup</name>
    <email>info@circl.lu</email>
  </author>
  <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu" rel="alternate"/>
  <generator uri="https://lkiesow.github.io/python-feedgen" version="1.0.0">python-feedgen</generator>
  <subtitle>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</subtitle>
  <entry>
    <id>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-45855</id>
    <title>CVE-2026-45855 — ata: libata-scsi: avoid Non-NCQ command starvation</title>
    <updated>2026-10-01T16:27:30.146308+00:00</updated>
    <content type="xhtml">
      <div xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml"><p><strong>Affected:</strong> Linux</p>
<p>In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:</p>
<p>ata: libata-scsi: avoid Non-NCQ command starvation</p>
<p>When a non-NCQ command is issued while NCQ commands are being executed,
ata_scsi_qc_issue() indicates to the SCSI layer that the command issuing
should be deferred by returning SCSI_MLQUEUE_XXX_BUSY.  This command
deferring is correct and as mandated by the ACS specifications since
NCQ and non-NCQ commands cannot be mixed.</p>
<p>However, in the case of a host adapter using multiple submission queues,
when the target device is under a constant load of NCQ commands, there
are no guarantees that requeueing the non-NCQ command will be executed
later and it may be deferred again repeatedly as other submission queues
can constantly issue NCQ commands from different CPUs ahead of the
non-NCQ command. This can lead to very long delays for the execution of
non-NCQ commands, and even complete starvation for these commands in the
worst case scenario.</p>
<p>Since the block layer and the SCSI layer do not distinguish between
queueable (NCQ) and non queueable (non-NCQ) commands, libata-scsi SAT
implementation must ensure forward progress for non-NCQ commands in the
presence of NCQ command traffic. This is similar to what SAS HBAs with a
hardware/firmware based SAT implementation do.</p>
<p>Implement such forward progress guarantee by limiting requeueing of
non-NCQ commands from ata_scsi_qc_issue(): when a non-NCQ command is
received and NCQ commands are in-flight, do not force a requeu…</p></div>
    </content>
    <link href="https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-45855"/>
  </entry>
</feed>
