Patchlage

CVE-2026-72420

CVE CVE-2026-72420EUVD EUVD-2026-59319Published 2026-08-15T05:56:39.000ZLast changed 2026-08-17T05:44:00.000ZCVSS 8.8

What the advisory describes

In the Linux kernel, the following vulnerability has been resolved: md/raid5: avoid R5_Overlap races while breaking stripe batches KCSAN report a race in break_stripe_batch_list() vs. raid5_make_request() on sh->dev[i].flags (plain word write vs. atomic bit op).. and .. one possible scenario is: CPU1 CPU2 break_stripe_batch_list(sh1) -> handle sh2 -> lock(sh2) -> sh2->batch_head = NULL -> unlock(sh2) -> test_and_clear_bit(R5_Overlap, sh2->dev[i].flags) -> wake_up_bit(sh2->dev[i].flags) raid5_make_request() -> add_all_stripe_bios(sh2) -> lock(sh2) -> stripe_bio_overlaps(sh2) returns true batch_head is NULL, so new bio overlap exist bio on sh2 -> true -> set_bit(R5_Overlap, sh2->dev[i].flags) -> unlock(sh2) -> wait_on_bit(sh2->dev[i].flags) -> sh2->dev[i].flags = sh1->dev[i].flags & ~R5_Overlap No wait_up_bit(), CPU2 could be wait_on_bit() forever... Fix by : - Expand the protect zone. - Use batch_head's device flag's snaphot when no held head_sh->stripe_lock. - Move sh/head_sh->batch_head = NULL to the end of protected zone , and , any concurrent add_all_stripe_bios() grabs sh->stripe_lock now either: - see batch_head != null, and , is rejected by stripe_bio_overlaps() under the lock (no R5_Overlap wait ) , or , - sees batch_head == NULL, only after dev[i].flags has already been set and the prior R5_Overlap waiters worken. KCSAN report: ================================================ BUG: KCSAN: data-race in break_stripe_batch_list / raid5_make_request write (marked) to 0xffff8e89c8117548 of 8 bytes by task 4042 on cpu 0: raid5_make_request+0xea0/0x2930 md_handle_request+0x4a2/0xa40 md_submit_bio+0x109/0x1a0 __submit_bio+0x2ec/0x390 submit_bio_noacct_nocheck+0x457/0x710 submit_bio_noacct+0x2a7/0xc20 submit_bio+0x56/0x250 blkdev_direct_IO+0x54c/0xda0 blkdev_write_iter+0x38f/0x570 aio_write+0x22b/0x490 io_submit_one+0xa51/0xf70 __x64_sys_io_submit+0xf7/0x220 x64_sys_call+0x1907/0x1c60 do_syscall_64+0x130/0x570 entry_SYSCALL_64_after_hwframe+0x76/0x7e read to 0xffff8e89c8117548 of 8 bytes by task 4010 on cpu 5: break_stripe_batch_list+0x249/0x480 handle_stripe_clean_event+0x720/0x9b0 handle_stripe+0x32fb/0x4500 handle_active_stripes.isra.0+0x6e0/0xa50 raid5d+0x7e0/0xba0 md_thread+0x15a/0x2d0 kthread+0x1e3/0x220 ret_from_fork+0x37a/0x410 ret_from_fork_asm+0x1a/0x30 value changed: 0x0000000000000019 -> 0x0000000000000099 --> R5_Overlap

Source: EUVD (ENISA), in the words of the advisory.

Products the advisory names

These come from the advisory itself, not from any check we performed.

The versions shown are the advisory's own. Patchlage compares no version numbers and derives no judgement from them — which version is installed is something a person has to look up.

Carried in the product catalogue

An estate covering these products can be recorded in Patchlage. An advisory about them appears in the next morning's situation report.

Does this concern one of your customers?

This page cannot answer that — it does not know your estate. Whoever has recorded their environments gets the answer the morning after publication, together with a paragraph they can forward to the customer unedited.

Try it for 28 days

Patchlage reports hits and suspected hits. About everything else this system says nothing — neither this page nor the situation report ever claims that an estate is safe.