<?xml version='1.0' encoding='UTF-8'?>
<?xml-stylesheet href="/static/style.xsl" type="text/xsl"?>
<rss xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>Most recent entries from all</title>
    <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu</link>
    <description>Contains only the most 10 recent entries.</description>
    <docs>http://www.rssboard.org/rss-specification</docs>
    <generator>python-feedgen</generator>
    <language>en</language>
    <lastBuildDate>Tue, 29 Sep 2026 06:37:59 +0000</lastBuildDate>
    <item>
      <title>CVE-2026-98094 — staging: fbtft: make dirty_lock IRQ-safe</title>
      <link>https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-98094</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;staging: fbtft: make dirty_lock IRQ-safe&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;fbtft_mkdirty() can be reached from the fbcon rendering path while
processing printk() in hardirq context. Meanwhile, dirty_lock is also
taken by fbtft_deferred_io() in workqueue context with local interrupts
enabled.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lockdep reports a possible IRQ lock inversion involving dirty_lock and
console_owner. A hardirq can interrupt a CPU holding dirty_lock and
enter the console rendering path, which can attempt to acquire
dirty_lock again.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The following lockdep report was observed on an RK3566 system with
CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING enabled:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected
  swapper/2/0 just changed the state of lock:
  (console_owner){-...}-{0:0}
  but this lock took another, HARDIRQ-unsafe lock in the past:
  (&amp;amp;par-&amp;gt;dirty_lock){+.+.}-{2:2}&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;CPU0                    CPU1
  ----                    ----
  lock(&amp;amp;par-&amp;gt;dirty_lock);
                         local_irq_disable();
                         lock(console_owner);
                         lock(&amp;amp;par-&amp;gt;dirty_lock);
  &amp;lt;Interrupt&amp;gt;
    lock(console_owner);&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;*** DEADLOCK ***&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Use spin_lock_irqsave() for fbtft_mkdirty() and spin_lock_irq() for
fbtft_deferred_io(). They only access the dirty line range, so the
IRQ-off regions remain short.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <content:encoded>&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Affected:&lt;/strong&gt; Linux&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;staging: fbtft: make dirty_lock IRQ-safe&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;fbtft_mkdirty() can be reached from the fbcon rendering path while
processing printk() in hardirq context. Meanwhile, dirty_lock is also
taken by fbtft_deferred_io() in workqueue context with local interrupts
enabled.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Lockdep reports a possible IRQ lock inversion involving dirty_lock and
console_owner. A hardirq can interrupt a CPU holding dirty_lock and
enter the console rendering path, which can attempt to acquire
dirty_lock again.&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;The following lockdep report was observed on an RK3566 system with
CONFIG_PROVE_LOCKING enabled:&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;WARNING: possible irq lock inversion dependency detected
  swapper/2/0 just changed the state of lock:
  (console_owner){-...}-{0:0}
  but this lock took another, HARDIRQ-unsafe lock in the past:
  (&amp;amp;par-&amp;gt;dirty_lock){+.+.}-{2:2}&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;CPU0                    CPU1
  ----                    ----
  lock(&amp;amp;par-&amp;gt;dirty_lock);
                         local_irq_disable();
                         lock(console_owner);
                         lock(&amp;amp;par-&amp;gt;dirty_lock);
  &amp;lt;Interrupt&amp;gt;
    lock(console_owner);&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;*** DEADLOCK ***&lt;/p&gt;
&lt;p&gt;Use spin_lock_irqsave() for fbtft_mkdirty() and spin_lock_irq() for
fbtft_deferred_io(). They only access the dirty line range, so the
IRQ-off regions remain short.&lt;/p&gt;</content:encoded>
      <guid isPermaLink="false">https://vulnerability.circl.lu/vuln/cve-2026-98094</guid>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>
