https://vulnerability.circl.lu Contains only the most 10 recent entries. http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification python-feedgen en Thu, 01 Oct 2026 16:27:29 +0000 https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-45855 <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> <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> https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-45855